Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 57" 7680x2160 super ultrawide (mini-LED)

kasakka said:
Remember that DLSS is also dependent on your native res, so DLSS Quality at 4K (or its ultrawide variants) is higher base res than DLSS Quality at 3440x1440.

Have you tried using Scaled Resolution Editor to add e.g 5120x2160 to your 57" and running with black bars on sides instead?
Click to expand...
I would not be using DLSS at all if I am using the 3440x1440 display. Because that res is so much easier to drive so I would be using it at native or DLAA. Hence I am comparing here, 7680x2160 with DLSS quality/performance to 3440x1440 @ native or DLAA.

I havent tried running the lower res with black bars yet. Might give it a shot soon.
MistaSparkul said:
RTX 5090 if it comes out this year might be the answer you need
Click to expand...

I do suppose I can wait for that.
 
-snoopi- said:
I would not be using DLSS at all if I am using the 3440x1440 display. Because that res is so much easier to drive so I would be using it at native or DLAA. Hence I am comparing here, 7680x2160 with DLSS quality/performance to 3440x1440 @ native or DLAA.

I havent tried running the lower res with black bars yet. Might give it a shot soon.


I do suppose I can wait for that.
Click to expand...

If you're asking whether or not DLSS from a lower resolution would look better than a higher native resolution, it's tough to answer because the actual DLSS implementation in games varies in how good they look. For example, on a 4K screen running DLSS Performance mode, the internal resolution is just 1920x1080p which is then upscaled to 3840x2160. So would that look better or worst than a screen that is native 2560x1440p? The native resolution is HIGHER than the DLSS internal resolution, but it is LOWER than the final output resolution of DLSS. Whether or not it looks better highly depends on the implementation of DLSS Performance mode in that specific game. However, if you switch the 4K screen to DLSS Quality then now both screens have the same resolution of 2560x1440p but the DLSS Quality upscales it to 4K and it looks far superior than native 1440p in that case for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
What about if I were to use the 39" with DLDSR in games.

I have never used DLDSR, but heard it can increase detail in output reolution.
 
-snoopi- said:
What about if I were to use the 39" with DLDSR in games.

I have never used DLDSR, but heard it can increase detail in output reolution.
Click to expand...

Well DLDSR would definitely help close the gap a bit but I checked the PPI of the LG and it's only 95, while the 57" Samsung is 140 PPI. That is quite a massive difference in PPI on top of the Samsung technically being "4K" resolution but doubled vs 1440p on the LG. But then again on the Samsung your option for getting decent fps involves using DLSS performance mode, so now we are in this strange territory of comparing DLSS performance mode on a 4K screen vs DLDSR on a 1440p screen. I don't own anymore 1440p screens so I can't do any comparisons. Honestly I have no clue which one would actually look better in this case I think you will just have to try both and see for yourself.
 
PPI is still PPI. DLDSR will help improve a games picture quality but the pixels are still huge.
 
Once again, I may have to drop cash on a expensive gaming display just to compare. When will I learn?
 
Or maybe, when I get home I will try a 3440x1440 res on my 57" G9 and see if the quality bothers me. Its nearly the same height display as the 39" Oled, so essentially should look similar at the same res yea?
 
-snoopi- said:
Or maybe, when I get home I will try a 3440x1440 res on my 57" G9 and see if the quality bothers me. Its nearly the same height display as the 39" Oled, so essentially should look similar at the same res yea?
Click to expand...
That might be the best way to go about it. It will be more blurry of course but should give you some idea.
 
I threw the Nitro 7900xtx in the 7950x3D rig and am getting 200-240 fps in BF1 (with all settings @ medium) and OMG so much fun and smooooooooooooth! I could probably poke and prod a couple settings up to high and ultra with minimal fps loss, but am having way to much fun with it to bother!

Playing BF1, Halo Infinite, Halo MCC, Doom Eternal and other classics @240hz has been worth the price of admission......well that and work productivity too!
 
Ugh how do you add custom resolutions. Trying to add 3440x1440 to test.

Tried CRU, won't work
Tried Custom resolution in NVCP, greyed out
Tried registry hack NV_Modes, didn't work either

EDIT:
Nevermind, finally got custom res working.
 
Last edited:
-snoopi- said:
Ugh how do you add custom resolutions. Trying to add 3440x1440 to test.

Tried CRU, won't work
Tried Custom resolution in NVCP, greyed out
Tried registry hack NV_Modes, didn't work either

EDIT:
Nevermind, finally got custom res working.
Click to expand...
Scaled Resolution Editor is the best option for anything that uses DSC.
 
Ok so just testing 3440x1440, and I find it is totally fine for gaming. Can barely notice much difference. Difference is only really noticable in desktop reading text.
 
Anyways, I got the LG 39GS95QE yesterday.

Been testing it against the 57" G9 for gaming. Will update impressions soon.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Windows desktop HDR? That's just a typical Samsung problem I believe. If it's happening in game though not sure how to fix it.
Click to expand...
Yea windows desktop is trash in HDR with the 57.

Also, AMD GPU dont let you do HDR @ native 240hz if you have 10 bit enabled....you gotta step it down to 8 bit and even then it doesnt look good.

HDR at native 120hz looks pretty great on Nvidia 4000 gpus though!
 
l88bastard said:
Also, AMD GPU dont let you do HDR @ native 240hz if you have 10 bit enabled....you gotta step it down to 8 bit and even then it doesnt look good.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Even on an AMD 7000 series GPU and using DP 2.1? Does it work if you drop down to 4:2:2 or 4:2:0?
 
Last edited:
Someone on Reddit with connections to Samsung was able to get some firmware release notes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/1akewie/57_g9_firmware_10053/kpkgktj/

That 3-way PbP feature sounds actually really cool. It seems to support 3x 2560x2160 atm.

If they were able to make it a 2x 1920x2160 + 1x 3840x2160 then that would work really great for people who want to game and have side apps at the same time, something that requires awkward borderless/windowed gaming atm. Even though you lose HDR/VRR in that scenario but probably fine for e.g eSports players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
kasakka said:
Someone on Reddit with connections to Samsung was able to get some firmware release notes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/1akewie/57_g9_firmware_10053/kpkgktj/

That 3-way PbP feature sounds actually really cool. It seems to support 3x 2560x2160 atm.

If they were able to make it a 2x 1920x2160 + 1x 3840x2160 then that would work really great for people who want to game and have side apps at the same time, something that requires awkward borderless/windowed gaming atm. Even though you lose HDR/VRR in that scenario but probably fine for e.g eSports players.
Click to expand...

I hope that works out like that for you, would be cool. I've heard that the break-out box versions of samsung (e.g. 8k) gaming tvs and their 55" 4k ark screen can't use game mode in PbP. If that is true than their PbP stuff wouldn't be as useful for gaming I guess (even though the PbP tiles can do 120hz on the ark vs 165hz full screen). I know that' isn't an apples to apples comparison of PbP functionality of the different displays to a G95NC, but make sure that PbP tiling doesn't create any appreciable detriments gaming wise. HDR would already be a big enough loss though imo. I love HDR and now there is HDR injection for SDR games on top of that.
 
elvn said:
I hope that works out like that for you, would be cool. I've heard that the break-out box versions of samsung (e.g. 8k) gaming tvs and their 55" 4k ark screen can't use game mode in PbP. If that is true than their PbP stuff wouldn't be as useful for gaming I guess (even though the PbP tiles can do 120hz on the ark vs 165hz full screen). I know that' isn't an apples to apples comparison of PbP functionality of the different displays to a G95NC, but make sure that PbP tiling doesn't create any appreciable detriments gaming wise. HDR would already be a big enough loss though imo. I love HDR and now there is HDR injection for SDR games on top of that.
Click to expand...
Yeah losing HDR would be a big one for me too, which is why I mentioned it would be a good usecase for eSports gamers who might have a YT video, Discord and whatnot running at the same time and don't care so much about image quality.

I think it's still a step in the right direction, though IMO having an EDID that supports 5Kx2K and 6Kx2K out of the box would be much more useful.

My fear is that this might be one of the last monitors Samsung makes without the TizenOS crap. The OLED G9 doesn't seem to have even the 21:9 + 11:9 split for the PbP mode, and all settings are far more buried in the smart TV nonsense. I wouldn't be against the smart TV functionality per se, but I know that TizenOS is a pile of shit that operates like a bad streaming service app.
 
kasakka said:
Seriously? Even on an AMD 7000 series GPU and using DP 2.1? Does it work if you drop down to 4:2:2 or 4:2:0?
Click to expand...
I have a 7900xtx Nitro in my 8700k work productivity rig...I haven't tried 422 or 420.
I primarily use the display for work productivity at native res 10bit or SDR gaming older titles like Halo MCC.

My other rig with 4090 gives a better gaming experience despite 120hz limitations and HDR looks good so I don't bother much with amd hdr on 7900xtx.
 
kasakka said:
Someone on Reddit with connections to Samsung was able to get some firmware release notes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/1akewie/57_g9_firmware_10053/kpkgktj/

That 3-way PbP feature sounds actually really cool. It seems to support 3x 2560x2160 atm.

If they were able to make it a 2x 1920x2160 + 1x 3840x2160 then that would work really great for people who want to game and have side apps at the same time, something that requires awkward borderless/windowed gaming atm. Even though you lose HDR/VRR in that scenario but probably fine for e.g eSports players.
Click to expand...
Is windowed gaming really that bad these days though? Not done it i many years so it is more a feeling from what I have heard and it also seem to be a built in option more these days so you don't have to use "hacks" for it.
 
l88bastard said:
I have a 7900xtx Nitro in my 8700k work productivity rig...I haven't tried 422 or 420.
I primarily use the display for work productivity at native res 10bit or SDR gaming older titles like Halo MCC.

My other rig with 4090 gives a better gaming experience despite 120hz limitations and HDR looks good so I don't bother much with amd hdr on 7900xtx.
Click to expand...
If you can, please give 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 a try. I'd be interested if it can handle that. That would at least solve the issue for media/gaming.

I hadn't heard of this issue earlier and though the 7900XTX would do 8Kx2K @ 240 Hz @ 10-bit + HDR just fine. I guess this display is really pushing the bandwidth limits...
 
improwise said:
Is windowed gaming really that bad these days though? Not done it i many years so it is more a feeling from what I have heard and it also seem to be a built in option more these days so you don't have to use "hacks" for it.
Click to expand...
It's a mixed bag.

While most games support borderless window mode nowadays, how they behave with borderless + "less than native" resolution, like say 3840x2160 on a 7680x2160 screen, seems to vary.
  • Some games will treat it as fullscreen and just stretch the image to full screen area at 4K 16:9. Very wide faces ahead!
  • Some games will treat it as fullscreen but render black bars around the displayed area.
  • Some games will just render at the center of the screen in a 4K size window without window controls, and you see your desktop around that area.
None of these are technically wrong, more like different opinions for how it's supposed to work.

The last one would be the most desirable scenario for people who want gaming + other stuff on screen at the same time. Moving the game area from from the center (e.g for a game on one side setup) can be difficult, requiring hacky things like maybe keyboard shortcuts that can pick the specific application window and alter its coordinates.

Using actual windowed mode will generally perform worse than borderless and might have higher input lag too. Plus you get those pesky window controls up top, though you can then move the window around easily. Hacky tools are needed to hide the window borders and controls.

PbP mode gets around all that at the expense of max refresh rate, HDR and VRR support. I wish there was a concept like "virtual monitor region" on Windows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top