LG has introduced the industry’s first IPS displays featuring a 1 ms response time. The new UltraGear monitors bring together high image quality that LG’s Nano IPS panels are known for, the DCI-P3 color gamut, high performance, and NVIDIA G-Sync support. Aimed primarily at gamers, the new UltraGear monitors will come in 27-inch and 37.5-inch sizes.

The smaller monitor is the LG UltraGear 27GL850 that uses a 27-inch IPS panel featuring a 2560×1440 (16:9) resolution, 350 nits brightness, a 144 Hz refresh rate, and 1 ms GtG response time. The larger display is the UltraGear 38GL950G based on a 37.5-inch panel offering a wider aspect ratio 3840×1600 (21.5:9) resolution, 450 nits brightness, a 175 Hz refresh rate (when overclocked), and also a 1 ms response time. The smaller monitor supports HDR10, whereas the bigger one is DisplayHDR 400 certified.

Both UltraGear 27GL850 and UltraGear 38GL950G LCDs can display 1.07 billion colors and cover 98% of the DCI-P3 color gamut, a very good result for gaming-grade monitors. The two displays also feature LG’s Nano IPS panels featuring a special nanoparticle cover applied to the screen’s LED backlighting to fine-tune its spectral output to absorb surplus light wavelengths and increase intensity, purity, as well as the accuracy of the on-screen colors.

Since LG’s UltraGear displays are designed primarily for gamers, both support a number of features aimed at this audience. Apart from NVIDIA’s G-Sync dynamic refresh rate technology, the new LCDs also support LG’s Dynamic Action Sync mode, Black Stabilizer, and Crosshair functions. Besides, the larger display supports LG’s Sphere Lighting 2.0 technology.

As far as connectivity is concerned, both LG’s UltraGear 27GL850 and UltraGear 38GL950G monitors feature DisplayPort and HDMI inputs, as well as a dual-port USB 3.0 hub. Meanwhile, they have neither a headphone jack nor integrated speakers.

The LG UltraGear-Series Displays
  27GL850 38GL950G
Panel 27" IPS 37.5" IPS
Native Resolution 2560 × 1440
(16:9)
3840 × 1600
(21.5:9)
Refresh Rate 144 Hz Native: ? Hz
Overclocked: 175 Hz
Dynamic Refresh Rate Technology NVIDIA G-Sync compatible NVIDIA G-Sync
Range ? ?
Response Time 1 ms (gray-to-gray)
Brightness 350 cd/m² 450 cd/m²
Contrast ?
Color Gamut 125% sRGB
98% DCI-P3
Viewing Angles 178°/178° horizontal/vertical (?)
Curvature none curved
Inputs 1 × DisplayPort 1.2
2 × HDMI 2.0
1 × DisplayPort 1.2
1 × HDMI 2.0
USB Hub 2 × USB 3.0 Type-A 2 × USB 3.0 Type-A
Audio none
Proprietary Enhancements Dynamic Action Sync mode,
Black Stabilizer,
Crosshair
Stand Height ?
Tilt ? ?
Swivel ? ?
Power Consumption Idle ?
Typical ?
Maximum ?

LG plans to start sales of the UltraGear 27GL850 display in the third quarter with pre-orders in the US starting on July 1, 2019. LG does not disclose pricing of either UltraGear 27GL850 or UltraGear 38GL950G monitors, but without any doubts both will belong to the company’s premium family of products.

Related Reading:

Source: LG

POST A COMMENT

51 Comments

View All Comments

  • mode_13h - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link

    Obviously. But, it seemed like you were only proposing 24:10 because it simplified the numerator, in this particular case. As awkward as it is to use 9 everywhere, at least it eases the task of comparing them. IMO, that's the main priority.

    I would much prefer to go decimal than switch everything to a denominator of 10. Then, we can do away with the silly W:H notation, as well.
    Reply
  • piroroadkill - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link

    Ratios as fractions should, in reality, be reduced to the nearest integer, so your example should be 12:5.

    Then again, I'm no fan of any of this, I prefer the 1.6:1, 1.77:1 format. Forget integers, and just make the width a proportion of a fixed (1) height.
    Reply
  • mode_13h - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link

    > Ratios as fractions should, in reality, be reduced to the nearest integer, so your example should be 12:5

    Well, if you don't constrain the denominator, then you can have a policy of finding the nearest integral fraction. However, you're forgetting that these specs need to be easily comparable. So, what appeals to your mathematical sensibilities is actually consumer-unfriendly.

    > I prefer the 1.6:1, 1.77:1 format.

    If you use a denominator of 1, then just drop the silly W:H format. It's redundant and not obvious to neophytes.
    Reply
  • mode_13h - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link

    > the nearest integral fraction

    Uh, I should've just said "the nearest ratio of integers".
    Reply
  • npz - Thursday, June 13, 2019 - link

    oohh, nice. That 37.5" is the one to get. Aside from being very expensive the 27" 4k gsync hi-hz HDR monitors are a bit too small for 4k. I was hoping someone would make one that's 32", but 38" is great too Reply
  • imaheadcase - Thursday, June 13, 2019 - link

    My source said be $1800. So start saving. :P Reply
  • mobutu - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link

    27GL850 has a 2560 × 1440 resolution, which is ideal for 27".
    so not 4k.
    Reply
  • eek2121 - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link

    Windows may look like shit on 4k @ 27", but I assure you that Linux and OS-X look amazing. You haven't experienced 4k awesomeness until you play borderlands on a 4K IPS HDR monitor with the high res texture pack. Your eyes haven't been so pleased by the lack of font jaggedness until you browse the web. The detail of everything is eye popping and out of this world.

    Source: I have 2 4k 27" HDR monitors.
    Reply
  • mode_13h - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link

    I've seen a 4k 28" monitor, and it indeed looks nice. However, as I value framerates and am unlikely ever to spend more than about $500 on a GPU, I think 2560x1440 @ 27" is the best tradeoff. That e pixel density also works well for me. Reply
  • MisterAnon - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link

    27 inches is actually too big for 4k if you value pixel density. The pixel density of a 4k 37.5 inch moniter will be close to garbage and isn't worth buying at all. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now