AOC Agon AG493UCX: 49-inch 120 Hz Display with FreeSync

1440p isnt really enough on my 32, then i rather go 49 with 16:9 and UHD res.

 

but this is like 2 16:9 side by side, so the 49inch is more like 2 27" monitor, and i think 1440p fits ok.
Also a 8k by 2k ultra wide at 120hz what kind of connection would require?

 

Ok, your stooper smart. 16:9 is garbage, especially for racing games if your not on triples.

 

All for the low, low price of an arm, leg, liver, kidney and your first born!!!!

 

@Agonist
and? heard about ppl that do more than gaming? what about ppl that dont play the games you play?
i rather not see pixels, and even if its ultra wide, its same/higher than my 32in,
and even there 1440p is barely enough. and i dont even have the 20/20 vision anymore (when close to something).
not even talking about the fact i can get a screen for a lot less than this.

 

It's a 49 inch ultra-wide display.....

where can you find a 49 inch ultra-wide screen with a VA panel and higher resolution than 5120x1440, for a lower price....especially give that no price is even listed for this display.

 

never said i wanted a ultra wide, but even if, i prefer a higher res than 1440p on a moni with equal/more screen height than my 32 (2560x1440).
dont care about panel type, more about things like local dimming and proper color coverage/accuracy.

last time i saw it, it was listed for +1300$.
https://www.amazon.com/AOC-AG493UCX...07ZSGR4CH/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

i can get a 49X900F for about 800$, and when im really on a budget the 50" M series from vizio.

 

i was trying to point out that this screen has way less screen height than your 32 at 16:9. this is as high as a 27 inches.

 

even worse (size)
im not gonna give up real estate just to go ultra wide.

 

This gaming display is bigger than my TV.

 

I have the Samsung equivilent of this display (crg9). Looks identical to me. Guess its the same panel. Totally worth it for AOE2 Definitive Edition

 

Wish more display makers go beyond the 1440p height of UWs. 3840x1600 displays should be an emerging standard by now, unfortunately I believe only LG make them.

 

There already is very good 120hz 49" 5120x1440 VA panel monitor, HDR1000, with relatively good price if you dont want to wait. But competition is good, hopefully this brings those monitors down in price around 800-900 euro range.

Samsung 49-Inch CRG90
https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Double-49-Inch-Monitor-LC49RG90SSNXZA/dp/B07L9HCJ2V

 

If only xbox one x could use non 16:9 resolutions. I cannot imagine myself playing with 1/2 of the screen (in middle). I hope next gen will fix this limitation. But PC usage would be awesome. Just it happens I own both on the same room.

 

all I have to say is I tried 32" and 34" and the pitch between pixels was pretty bad (blurry) so yes the resolution is important on screens like this because of how close you are (doesn't matter on a TV)
I also realized I played mostly 16:9 games and it wasn't for me, I don't play simu anymore, I have a real car lol and I'm not enough of a strategy guy to want a screen only for that, must be awesome tough to see your world on a super large screen

too each his own, I've built an RGB case who am I to argue

 

This is a WOW / iRacing dream, really amazing monitor.

 

lol all these people commenting about the pixel density on the 49" ultrawide.... its got the same pixel density as a 27" 2560x1440 16:9 display, its basically two 27" 2560x1440 monitors side by side without a bezel in between... which to be honest is really appealing to me, I don't have the space for 3X 27" screens on my desk, and you cant game with 2X 27" screens as you spend your whole time staring at a bezel if you do that.

This type of monitor is awesome if you need the extra space and also want to be able to game on it as well, compared to having to just use one monitor to game if you go the dual screen setup route.

 

If you're not interested in an ultra-wide display, why are you even posting in this thread?

How exactly have you seen this display before? It hasn't even been released yet.

 

When will the display chauvinism ever stop in this forum?

This is a 32:9 ultrawide display with a height of 1440 pixels. Why are you popping in and saying you'd rather a 16:9 display of the same diagonal (which is irrelevant as they are different ratios) at a different resolution (4K)? How does that contribute to the discussion?