The absolutely enormous Samsung Odyssey G9 is a curved super-ultrawide monitor that promises to offer the most immersive gaming experience on the market. This is a 49-inch monitor equivalent to two 27-inch 1440p displays stitched together.
Samsung Odyssey G9 Review: Super-Ultrawide
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
Shadowboxer
Posts: 2,074 +1,655
psycros
Posts: 4,788 +7,391
There is no legit reason for the HDMI to be limited to 60hz and HDMI 2. HDMI 4 can do anything Displayport can do. No idea why the industry seems intent on going back to one standard for monitors and another for every other kind of display - I thought HDMI was supposed to end this dichotomy.
godrilla
Posts: 1,365 +893
I had a choice between this and the 48 inch CX oled although 2 different beasts. The lack of support for game developers for this aspect ratio and even any ultrawide monitor during cutscenes brakes the immersion for what is probably the most immersive gaming experience during gameplay. The 4k oled at 120hz hdmi 2.1 keeps you immersed during cutscenes while probably less immersed during gameplay. I believe LTT compared the cx oled to a 360 hz monitor where is came very close in response time when at 240hz FYI. I would be nice to see a review for the oled. Great article! If it wasn't for the CX 48 inch model I would definitely get this.
QuantumPhysics
Posts: 6,306 +7,258
NOPE.
1440p???
I'm going to upgrade from my 1440p Alienware 34" to the new 38" 4K.
1440p???
I'm going to upgrade from my 1440p Alienware 34" to the new 38" 4K.
brucek
Posts: 1,725 +2,689
It seems important to understand what games do and don't do with this uncommon aspect ratio. Is it true that most games will automatically notice the wide aspect ratio and adjust FOV accordingly, and will the game look and play well with that much wider FOV? Or will they do something less satisfying like just take the same default FOV and stretch it thin, so that you're losing as much in height detail and as you are gaining in width detail?
For games that can not play well on the full screen, is there at least a safe fallback setting where they can be set to display at a standard 16:9 resolution at the center of the screen? If you do this can you safely put a browser, video player, etc. on the outside margins?
These are the kinds of issues I'd really like to understand in depth before considering a monitor like this. As in, the same way a GPU review would present game-by-game frame rates, maybe a game-by-game compatibility/playability report at this aspect ratio?
For games that can not play well on the full screen, is there at least a safe fallback setting where they can be set to display at a standard 16:9 resolution at the center of the screen? If you do this can you safely put a browser, video player, etc. on the outside margins?
These are the kinds of issues I'd really like to understand in depth before considering a monitor like this. As in, the same way a GPU review would present game-by-game frame rates, maybe a game-by-game compatibility/playability report at this aspect ratio?
TomSEA
Posts: 3,372 +2,237
I recently bought the 32" Samsung Odyssey G7 and it's plenty wide enough. And with 1440, plenty of resolution too. Games especially look terrific. I'll leave 4k for those who think it makes any sort of discernible difference to the eye.
I also think 48" is overkill. Just waiting for the first neck injury lawsuit of someone who snaps their head trying to look from one end to the other.
I also think 48" is overkill. Just waiting for the first neck injury lawsuit of someone who snaps their head trying to look from one end to the other.
Doppleganger3333
Posts: 9 +10
I have the predecessor (Samsung CRG9) which has an 1800R curve which you don't notice really when right in front of it. 1000R is more curved so I'm not sure how that would feel.
As far games go it's usually normal ultrawide stretched which isn't too bad until you notice how objects get much bigger as they move closer to the edges. It is annoying but the extra immersion is more than worth it. Changing to a wider FOV can somewhat alleviate this.
I'm sure you change the resolution back to 16.9 but I've never tried that, negates somewhat the purpose of having such a wide screen in the first place.
Burty117
Posts: 5,108 +3,689
Well, that's not true now is it. They are two different standards for two different markets.
HDMI has higher licensing fees levied on it, it support ARC (Audio Return Channel), It can carry an Ethernet signal and generally supports longer cables without losing signal strength. It's bandwidth is lower (I'm excluding HDMI 2.1) because it was designed for 60Hz applications.
DisplayPort on the other hand was made by the same guys who did VGA and DVI and this was their follow up on it. It supports higher bandwidths as it's more common to find higher refresh displays in the monitor segment, it can daisy chain making multi-monitors easier and finally, can adapt to many other connections without needing active adaptors.
I'm not even sure why you'd want to use HDMI from your computer to a monitor and since it's HDMI 2.0 and not 2.1, at this resolution it wouldn't be able to go above 60Hz anyway.
I'm just waiting for DisplayPort 2.0 to start coming out before I make another monitor purchase.
From what I've read it is not 4K. It is 3840x1600. 4K would be 3840x2160.
The horizontal resolution IS the same as 4k, but only because it is so wide. Vertically, this is still the same pixel density as 1440p.
I may be wrong here, but I don't think this is a true 4K monitor. Either way, it will be a serious challenge for any GPU right now, especially at 120Hz!
Last edited:
QuantumPhysics
Posts: 6,306 +7,258
From what I've read it is not 4K. It is 3840x1600. 4K would be 3840x2160.
The horizontal resolution IS the same as 4k, but only because it is so wide. Height wise, this is still the same pixel density as 1440p.
I may be wrong here, but I don't think this is a true 4K monitor. Either way, it will be a serious challenge for any GPU right now, especially at 120Hz!
You're right. I can wait till the revision 4K model comes to market.
Techspot, you may want to correct your review as the G9 issues with Nvidia 30-series cards running at 240hz have since been fixed. Running a 3080/3090 at 240hz was specifically fixed with the 1008 firmware release, and it has worked flawlessly with the last several latest Nvidia driver releases. Note that if you ran into issues testing this, the fix is simple as it just requires you to do a clean install of the Nvidia drivers. Worst case scenario, DDU may be needed.
I have a 3090 and G9, and have been closely monitoring this issue since it cropped up when the 3000 cards came out.
I have a 3090 and G9, and have been closely monitoring this issue since it cropped up when the 3000 cards came out.
I bought this display during black Friday. I was worried about the curve, but once you been using it, I wouldn't have any other way. I currently run it on a gtx 1070 @ 120hz 8bit, since it doesn't support dsc. I cannot use adaptive sync without a slight flickering like the old crt's. It is with firmware 1008.1 and newest drivers.
The Fov is another thing you will have to adapt to, as the geometry close to the edges are warped, compared to center.
Before I had a 27" 1440p and at work I have a 34" Uw, but for gaming this monitor is simply another level.
Hopefully it will be possible to get a new video card in '21.
The Fov is another thing you will have to adapt to, as the geometry close to the edges are warped, compared to center.
Before I had a 27" 1440p and at work I have a 34" Uw, but for gaming this monitor is simply another level.
Hopefully it will be possible to get a new video card in '21.
Have you tried it? I was sceptic before I bought it, now I'm not. I love the curve. Obviously I'm not going to use it for anything professional work, besides office applications. Also there would be colorshift if it wasn't curved.
Knot Schure
Posts: 431 +206
I saw one in Singapore (not 240Hz) and nearly bought it on the spot. After much faff over price, the seller was kind enough to suggest that the Singaporean-purchase *may* run into warranty issues for me back in Thailand, so I passed hoping to buy it when back in LOS (land of smiles), but got side-tracked with work & China virus, and it took a back burner.
I will insta-buy this when I get back there is a couple of months, which should be a good amount of time for a potential price-drop too.
I will also run it at 220Hz, based on this review.
Sceptics can remain just that - until they've seen & tried one of these.
I got it for $1350, with the regular price being $1850 here in Denmark.
Neatfeatguy
Posts: 1,615 +3,045
If you're gaming, it's not ideal for ultra-wide resolutions across most games based on the last 5 years of running 5760x1080.
Most games don't officially support ultra-wide and you're left with a fish-eye like lens effect in a lot of games. Image looks good in the center and about 2/3 of the way to the edges of the monitor, then the images become distorted/elongated/stretched out on the sides. Adjusting FOV generally does nothing to alleviate the issue.
Many game's don't utilize the ultra-wide resolution well in menus, videos and cut scenes.
Menus: I played across 5760x1080 for years and countless games would pop into 5760x1080 and I couldn't properly navigate the menu due to it being off-center or so stretched out the mouse doesn't point to menu options correctly and the only way to fix resolution issues is to go into the .ini files and manually edit resolution down to something more feasible. In my case I could adjust it down to 1920x1080 since I was using 3 monitors and utilize Nvidia 2D Surround to generate the 5760x1080.
Videos & Cut scenes: if they don't play correctly and look nice, they tend to either be so stretched out it resembles a giant 480p image or the image is so smashed it only takes up about 1/10 of the monitor space (think vertical video/portrait taken on a cell phone instead of the nice landscape view it should be).
HUDs in a lot of games are not designed to recognize the ultra-wide resolution and play nice.
Some games the HUD is just horribly stretched out and looks like crap.
Some games the HUD is not optimally placed and you actually have to swivel your head left or right some to properly view parts of the HUD.
Some games do it correctly and all HUD aspects are in the center of the screen and easy to read/use.
If you can find games that let you navigate the menus and settings at ultra-wide resolutions and even play the game without too much distortion, ultra-wide gaming is pretty amazing.....having 3 monitors stretch across almost 5ft as you play, it was certainly fun, but sometimes a giant headache getting around issues to play games at that ultra-wide resolution.
I just recently moved away to 2560x1440 on a single monitor and while I do miss a few games I enjoyed at 5760x1080, but I don't miss the headaches of getting through menus/settings and manually adjusting resolutions if I couldn't get it done in the game itself.
Most games don't officially support ultra-wide and you're left with a fish-eye like lens effect in a lot of games. Image looks good in the center and about 2/3 of the way to the edges of the monitor, then the images become distorted/elongated/stretched out on the sides. Adjusting FOV generally does nothing to alleviate the issue.
Many game's don't utilize the ultra-wide resolution well in menus, videos and cut scenes.
Menus: I played across 5760x1080 for years and countless games would pop into 5760x1080 and I couldn't properly navigate the menu due to it being off-center or so stretched out the mouse doesn't point to menu options correctly and the only way to fix resolution issues is to go into the .ini files and manually edit resolution down to something more feasible. In my case I could adjust it down to 1920x1080 since I was using 3 monitors and utilize Nvidia 2D Surround to generate the 5760x1080.
Videos & Cut scenes: if they don't play correctly and look nice, they tend to either be so stretched out it resembles a giant 480p image or the image is so smashed it only takes up about 1/10 of the monitor space (think vertical video/portrait taken on a cell phone instead of the nice landscape view it should be).
HUDs in a lot of games are not designed to recognize the ultra-wide resolution and play nice.
Some games the HUD is just horribly stretched out and looks like crap.
Some games the HUD is not optimally placed and you actually have to swivel your head left or right some to properly view parts of the HUD.
Some games do it correctly and all HUD aspects are in the center of the screen and easy to read/use.
If you can find games that let you navigate the menus and settings at ultra-wide resolutions and even play the game without too much distortion, ultra-wide gaming is pretty amazing.....having 3 monitors stretch across almost 5ft as you play, it was certainly fun, but sometimes a giant headache getting around issues to play games at that ultra-wide resolution.
I just recently moved away to 2560x1440 on a single monitor and while I do miss a few games I enjoyed at 5760x1080, but I don't miss the headaches of getting through menus/settings and manually adjusting resolutions if I couldn't get it done in the game itself.
Last edited:
Your set up was 48:9, so even more than 32:9 and I can understand the problems you had, and going even wider than 32:9 does not seem feasible except for specific games. The few games I've played has all supported the resolution out of the box. Yes the perspective is warped close to the edges, but the center where you have your focus is fine and the rest is for the immersion effect.
Knot Schure
Posts: 431 +206
Hej, jeg var fem år I Danmark.
But jeg ikke taler Dansk.So I couldn't imagine a n y t h I n g being 'well priced' there, but $1350 is about the same, well-done to you.
Oddly, I was in Danmark (on business) just a month ago, for a month, and it was my first trip back in almost a decade. Spent a BOMB on restuaunts, passed by my old apartment in Christianshavn, walked all 'round the city to see what had changed (not much), caught up with the ex and her new life, and visited The Tivoli. When I went onto the UK, I was treated like I got off a plane direct from Wuhan. Denmark tested me twice, UK tested me twice.
Interesting times. Interesting country.
Tech prices are very similar except for the sales tax of 25%, but all that includes service personel is much more expensive as they are actually paid a quite high minimum wage.Hej, jeg var fem år I Danmark.
So I couldn't imagine a n y t h I n g being 'well priced' there, but $1350 is about the same, well-done to you.
Oddly, I was in Danmark (on business) just a month ago, for a month, and it was my first trip back in almost a decade. Spent a BOMB on restuaunts, passed by my old apartment in Christianshavn, walked all 'round the city to see what had changed (not much), caught up with the ex and her new life, and visited The Tivoli. When I went onto the UK, I was treated like I got off a plane direct from Wuhan. Denmark tested me twice, UK tested me twice.
Interesting times. Interesting country.
Grew up close to Copenhagen, now I live in rural Jutland. Much cheaperHej, jeg var fem år I Danmark.
So I couldn't imagine a n y t h I n g being 'well priced' there, but $1350 is about the same, well-done to you.
Oddly, I was in Danmark (on business) just a month ago, for a month, and it was my first trip back in almost a decade. Spent a BOMB on restuaunts, passed by my old apartment in Christianshavn, walked all 'round the city to see what had changed (not much), caught up with the ex and her new life, and visited The Tivoli. When I went onto the UK, I was treated like I got off a plane direct from Wuhan. Denmark tested me twice, UK tested me twice.
Interesting times. Interesting country.
Similar threads
