Expired

Why is this monitor so cheap?

5
Found 6th May
I'm looking to get a decent monitor with at least one of the features:
- Curved
- 21:9
- 1ms
- 2K Resolution

I've been looking around and have found an LG 25" monitor which checks two boxes, but the price is a millions times cheaper than its competitors, monitors that just tick one cost around £200 new, how is one that ticks both only £160? The model number is LG 25UM58. Is there something which is lacking in this? Thanks.
Community Updates
Ask
5 Comments
It only does 60 fps, it's 5ms not 1ms and there is only hdmi no display ports. The LG 25UM58 is also not curved.
Bear in mind it's also small by modern standards, a wide version of a 20" 16:9 FHD monitor. A 21:9ish version of a normal 23/24" screen comes out as 29/30".

The height is just as important as the width for most monitor uses, so I wouldn't buy based on the width of a screen ('2k'). 2560x1600 has 50% more screen area than 2560x1080, which is a massive difference.

Also, manufacturer response times are bunk and have been for a decade or more. If you want minimal motion blur these days you need to be looking at a screen with BFI/Backlight strobing, which tends to show up at a few hundred quid.
EndlessWaves2 h, 31 m ago

Bear in mind it's also small by modern standards, a wide version of a 20" …Bear in mind it's also small by modern standards, a wide version of a 20" 16:9 FHD monitor. A 21:9ish version of a normal 23/24" screen comes out as 29/30". The height is just as important as the width for most monitor uses, so I wouldn't buy based on the width of a screen ('2k'). 2560x1600 has 50% more screen area than 2560x1080, which is a massive difference. Also, manufacturer response times are bunk and have been for a decade or more. If you want minimal motion blur these days you need to be looking at a screen with BFI/Backlight strobing, which tends to show up at a few hundred quid.


Got a habit of thinking 2560 means 2K even though I know it isn't. I agree on everything, the monitor needs to be a lot bigger which I have just realised, I've been looking around and the closest to what I want seems to be in the range of 29-34". Usually in the market for phones and consoles so don't know much about monitors. I don't care too much about warranty or replacements, it's odd but I've never had to replace any electronics, ever. Don't wanna go too far with the little tweaks as they pile money up quickly.

My budget is up to £200, but I want something interesting. I was looking at the white HP 27" curved, that looks beautiful. Then I found 21:9 monitors for £150 and now I'm hooked onto that, everyday I'm finding new things. So have you got any suggestions on sleek, good looking monitors under £200 (I don't mind it being used)?
Edited by: "sAmeri" 6th May
What are you using it for? If it's for a console/blu-ray player then I'd drop the idea of 21:9 as they don't tend to support screens other than 16:9. Some ultra-widescreen monitors do offer a basic scaling up option for films but you'd need a PC to benefit from it in games.

If you are using it for a PC then how far away would you be viewing it from? It doesn't work like consoles where you always see the same picture and only the physical size of the TV determines how big stuff is. On a computer the higher the resolution the more stuff you can fit on screen so a 1440 pixel tall screen will let you see more of a website at once than a 1080 pixel tall screen.

So this means that stuff on a 2560x1440 27" screen will be much smaller than on a 1920x1080 27" screen. This is good because you can fit more on, but bad because small details are harder to see and text is harder to read.

The standard size is considered to be around 92-96dpi, which is 23-24" at 1920x1080. If you're sitting a bit futher away than normal - a meter instead of 60-70cm - you want to be looking at the lower DPI screens. If you're sitting a bit closer, have a desire to cram lots of stuff on or have particularly picky sight then the higher DPI screens may be appropriate.

There are various workarounds like running at a lower resolution or using the windows scaling function but on anything other than very high DPI screens (160dpi+) they produce a softening of the picture. Although they're perfectly acceptable if your priority is aesthetics.

I'm not sure what there is in the way of looks, my interest has always been about the area inside the frame not the bits outside it. AOC have always had some nice stands on their mainstream monitors so they're worth a look.
EndlessWaves1 h, 36 m ago

What are you using it for? If it's for a console/blu-ray player then I'd …What are you using it for? If it's for a console/blu-ray player then I'd drop the idea of 21:9 as they don't tend to support screens other than 16:9. Some ultra-widescreen monitors do offer a basic scaling up option for films but you'd need a PC to benefit from it in games.If you are using it for a PC then how far away would you be viewing it from? It doesn't work like consoles where you always see the same picture and only the physical size of the TV determines how big stuff is. On a computer the higher the resolution the more stuff you can fit on screen so a 1440 pixel tall screen will let you see more of a website at once than a 1080 pixel tall screen. So this means that stuff on a 2560x1440 27" screen will be much smaller than on a 1920x1080 27" screen. This is good because you can fit more on, but bad because small details are harder to see and text is harder to read.The standard size is considered to be around 92-96dpi, which is 23-24" at 1920x1080. If you're sitting a bit futher away than normal - a meter instead of 60-70cm - you want to be looking at the lower DPI screens. If you're sitting a bit closer, have a desire to cram lots of stuff on or have particularly picky sight then the higher DPI screens may be appropriate.There are various workarounds like running at a lower resolution or using the windows scaling function but on anything other than very high DPI screens (160dpi+) they produce a softening of the picture. Although they're perfectly acceptable if your priority is aesthetics. I'm not sure what there is in the way of looks, my interest has always been about the area inside the frame not the bits outside it. AOC have always had some nice stands on their mainstream monitors so they're worth a look.


The monitor will be used for 2 things, work (word, PowerPoint documents etc) and entertainment (movies and games). I'm going to be regular distance which is the 60-70cm when working and gaming, and a meter or 2 away when watching a movie. I've looked at AOC but their monitors are a little clunky.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions

    Top Discussions

    Top Merchants