LG Unveils World's First Bendable 5K2K Gaming Monitor With Dual Mode Support and DP 2.1

[milesk182]

The 39inch 5k2k is my dream monitor. i wonder if it will as well have the 34 and 27 inch options with faster frame rate in it as well. The current 39GX90SA they're showcasing, does anyone know if this is a 5k2k or is it just the same as they're current 3440x1440p? On another note, the 45 has been confirmed to be 165hz, the 240hz will come later.

 

[FoulOnWhite]

Why does a monitor need to bend, it just sits on your desk.

 

[milesk182]

Is LG trying to be Corsair now?

Lol, LG makes the screen that's in the Corsair.

Why does a monitor need to bend, it just sits on your desk.

I agree, although one thought is the 800R curve being quite a lot. Getting it close to the 1800R is better for my needs. The 39 inch will be amazing though, omg I'm so excited!

 

[TheLostSwede]

Why does a monitor need to bend, it just sits on your desk.

Because some people like a curved monitor when gaming and a flat monitor when working.
Also, it flexes, it doesn't bend, at least not like a phone screen.

 

[Cheeseball]

Is LG trying to be Corsair now?

The Corsair Xeneon Flex did use LG's first 34" OLED panel, which I believe was the bendable version of 34GS95QE-B in early 2023.

5120x2160@165Hz or 2560x1080@330Hz is not bad. Hopefully LG improved their hardware integer scaler.

This doesn't have Pixel Sound right? I don't see it mentioned in the marketing fluff.

 

[Baba]

Very interesting, I have the smaller brother of those. Where’s the Hz info though? Pricing will be high anyway.

Native 165Hz refresh rate at 5120 x 2160, with the ability then to double the refresh rate to 330Hz if you lower the resolution by half to 2560 x 1080.

12:42 roadmap

 

[Tek-Check]

We need more and cheaper 21:9 34" OLED monitors.

We need more of anything beyond 32 inches which is 4K/2K and 5K/2K.

Any word on the UHBR of that DisplayPort 2.1? Because that resolution at probably 165Hz 10bit would require over 60Gbps, which means it needs to be UHBR20 in order to run at those specs without DSC. If it's anything less than UHBR20 then it might aswell just have DP2.0.

DP 2.0 is the same as DP 2.1 in terms of bandwidth.

This monitor has to deliver DP80 port. It's going to be expensive and LG MUST deliver the highest bandwidth so that users can choose to run it without DSC should they need to. It's unforgivable to force buyers to use DSC on expensive displays. There will be a huge outcry if LG doesn't deliver on ports.

It's not a matter of signal quality, it's just that DSC can introduce some annoyances, like stutters, glitches with multiple displays, taking seconds of screen-freeze to alt-tab in games that don't support (or aren't optimal) Borderless Fullscreen, makes some Nvidia features unusable and so on, that's why I'm mostly interested in DP2.1 primarily so I can run the full specs without DSC.

This perfectly makes sense and monitor vendors MUST finally deliver DP80 ports on any monitor costing more than $700.

If new GPUs do not have 80 Gbit's DP 2.1 this discussion is kinda moot and you will have to entertain those alleged "glitches".

Nvidia must finally deliver DP80 ports on all GPUs from 70 class and up. It's inexcusable to delay this transition further.

As a reminder, 4090, the most expensive consumer card, cannot run Samsung 57-inch Neo G9 8K/2K monitor at its native refresh rate 240Hz. It can only run it at 120Hz due to crippled DSC video pipeline that was recycled from 3090.

Essentially, Nvidia did not modernise video ports since 2020. They cannot underdeliver anymore and everybody is waiting for them to offer DP80 ports.

 

[R0H1T]

They cannot underdeliver anymore and everybody is waiting for them to offer DP80 ports.

They can definitely do that & get away with it, you underestimate JHH zealots

 

[warrior420]

It's crazy to think that a $1,500+ Nvidia GPU, or any Nvidia card currently, cant even run this monitor.

 

[Prima.Vera]

It's crazy to think that a $1,500+ Nvidia GPU, or any Nvidia card currently, cant even run this monitor.

It can, and it can do max refresh rate. Where did you get this??

 

[AcE]

As a reminder, 4090, the most expensive consumer card, cannot run Samsung 57-inch Neo G9 8K/2K monitor at its native refresh rate 240Hz.

It can with DSC afaik. I currently use 4K240 with DSC on a 4090. As I said smaller brother of those monitors.

They cannot underdeliver anymore and everybody is waiting for them to offer DP80 ports.

DP 2.1 is very likely but full 80 Gbit, who knows, AMD didn’t deliver it first gen and only gave 54Gbit so the same could be happening here as well. As long as all resolutions are handled it’s fine and with DP2.1 that’s easily the case, even 54Gbit so I don’t see a reason to panic.

Essentially, Nvidia did not modernise video ports since 2020.

Btw DP 1.4 is much older than that. Goes back to GTX 10 series. But it was enough for a long long time.

 

[Asni]

No, that is a link to the EXACT press release above. There is ZERO extra information there.

I don't get it. You just linked the LG website which is pointless.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I don't get it. You just linked the LG website which is pointless.

It's also pointless to link to the exact same text and pictures.
And no, it's not pointless for TPU as a site to link to LG, but when available, I always link to the product page, of which there is none yet, for either product.

 

[Tek-Check]

It can with DSC afaik. I currently use 4K240 with DSC on a 4090

4K/240Hz works, but 8K/2K/240Hz doesn't work, it hasn't been fixed and it will not be fixed until Nvidia introduces new cards with upgraded video pipeline.

 

[AcE]

4K/240Hz works, but 8K/2K/240Hz doesn't work, it hasn't been fixed and it will not be fixed until Nvidia introduces new cards with upgraded video pipeline.

It matters a low amount, because the fps you will reach at that resolution will be too low anyway to profit from 240Hz. The maximum then is 144/165 or whatever, probably 240 with 4:2:0 chroma sampling. That monitor is for what, triple A gaming? Good luck reaching enough fps in AAA games with a 4090 at that resolution, without significantly reducing settings (and using something like dlss ultra perf).

Yep, just calculated it, 7680x2160, which isn’t even real 8K, it’s just 4K Ultra Wide, uses DOUBLE the amount of pixel of 4K. You will never be able to make use of 240Hz with any current GPU anyway, so it was never a real detriment to 4090 not reaching 240Hz on that monitor. That monitor is for maximum 60-100 fps AAA gaming and maybe 120-144 in simulators that don’t need much performance.

 

[Tek-Check]

so it was never a real detriment to 4090 not reaching 240Hz on that monitor. That monitor is for maximum 60-100 fps AAA gaming and maybe 120-144 in simulators that don’t need much performance.

That monitor is not for gaming only, but for productivity too. If I buy the most expensive consumer GPU in the world, it MUST make sure that it's able to drive the full picture on such monitor, which is dual 4K/240Hz. I want to be able to scroll smoothly through my large documents if I pay almost 2,000 bucks for GPU.

I don't care much about gaming framerates. I care about paying a fortune for the GPU that cannot drive full picture on this monitor, whereas Intel and AMD cards can, as those have updated DSC video pipeline.

It's an utter joke that Nvidia recycled DSC video pipeline from PCB on 3090 and reused it unchanged on 4090, while charging consumers a fortune for new card with old video hardware. How many times would people still try to defend what cannot be defended in any circumstances?

 

[AcE]

That monitor is not for gaming only, but for productivity too.

And productivity never ever needs 240 Hz, they mostly work with 60 Hz. To the contrary.

I want to be able to scroll smoothly through my large documents if I pay almost 2,000 bucks for GPU.

So "less than 240 Hz" (= 144-165 Hz) equals "unsmooth" to you, got it. Good luck with that weird definition. btw, the vast majority of humanity considers 60 Hz smooth.

I care about paying a fortune for the GPU that cannot drive full picture on this monitor

Hz has nothing to do with "full picture", that is merely a higher rate of repeating the same picture. In other words you will not have decreased quality with a RTX 40 series card.

 

[warrior420]

Indie games are a thing... And they would look killer on this monitor maxed out.

 

[Tek-Check]

Hz has nothing to do with "full picture", that is merely a higher rate of repeating the same picture. In other words you will not have decreased quality with a RTX 40 series card.

The full picture capability of that monitor includes its higher refresh rate.

You can keep trying to split the hair in half, but the simple fact is that 4090 is not capable of running the full video spec of that monitor. Not sure how else to explain such simple observation.

 

[AcE]

The full picture capability of that monitor includes its higher refresh rate.

Full picture means full quality, full resolution, HDR things like that, not Hz, which is just frequency. Literally also "full picture" means if the card can even use the monitor at all.

You can keep trying to split the hair in half, but the simple fact is that 4090 is not capable of running the full video spec of that monitor. Not sure how else to explain such simple observation.

I never said anything else, I just said that it's pretty unrelevant, the resolution with 240 Hz is so high that it's undrivable / unusable anyway, and with the 5090 it is more usable - the 5090 will have DP2.1 probably, so everything has its place. I have 4K240 here, and even that is too much for a 4090 aside from a few games, and you are talking about double that amount of performance needed The monitor is simply too extreme you could say. I even doubt 5090 will be able to properly use it. With 50% more performance than 4090 maybe, it's far away from being able to properly drive the monitor in 240 Hz in 2x4K. 16 million pixels.

 

[Tek-Check]

Full picture means full quality, full resolution, HDR things like that, not Hz, which is just frequency.

No. Monitor picture capability includes refresh rate, in addition to all other features mentioned. Period. There's no if or but here.

I just said that it's pretty unrelevant, the resolution with 240 Hz is so high that it's undrivable / unusable anyway,

No, it's not irrelevant. The difference in smoothness and blur between 120Hz and 240Hz in document scrolling and other moving threads is substantial, especially if the monitor is used in productivity workloads in several industries.

The fact that 4090 is not capable of running basic picture on this monitor to its full refresh rate at 240Hz is a disgrace on Nvidia's part and inexcusable omission in lack of upgrade of DSC video pipeline on entire 4000 series of cards.

Again, there are no ifs and no buts here. It is what it is and this monitor simply exposed what Nvidia did not deliver in video pipeline. There are threads about this specific issue and solution will not be available due to hardware limitation.

 

[Easy Rhino]

I had an LG Ultragear 2 years ago and the connections kept dying on me. No support from LG. I will never buy again.

 

[Tek-Check]

I had an LG Ultragear 2 years ago and the connections kept dying on me. No support from LG. I will never buy again.

Did you not use warranty conditions?

 

[Easy Rhino]

Did you not use warranty conditions?

Only 1 year warranty.

 

[FoulOnWhite]

That’s the special 1yr countdown chip that activates on first power up, 1yr later, item fails. We had a 55” Toshiba that failed after about 55 weeks