LG 34GK950F Curved Gaming Monitor Review: 144Hz Ultrawide With HDR

HDR Performance

The 34GK950F conforms to the VESA DisplayHDR 400 standard, meaning it can produce over 400 nits peak white output. Since LCD monitors are limited in how low their black levels can be, the only way for them to increase contrast is to up their brightness quotient. Further enhancements come from full-array backlights and effective dynamic contrast algorithms. This LG provides passable HDR commensurate with its price point. If you want the ultimate presentation, it will come at a very high cost.

HDR Brightness & Contrast

The 34GK950F comfortably exceeded the VESA 400-nit spec with a score of 431 (first graph).

HDR black levels (second graph) were a bit disappointing, however, as they are the same as what we measured in SDR mode.

HDR contrast (third graph) is slightly higher at 1,175.5:1. We could see a small difference with HDR signals, but it was subtle at best. It’s obvious that LG has not employed an aggressive dynamic algorithm like the Philips or AOC monitors, which are both edge-lit and virtual kings in the black level contest.

Grayscale, EOTF & Color

There are no adjustments available for HDR signals, but you can still select from multiple picture modes. All presented a somewhat-cool grayscale, but the errors aren’t too high. The clip point is 65 percent, and rather than a hard transition, LG chose a softer clip. This approach dulls highlights a little and takes the edge off the HDR effect. We’d rather see the trace follow the yellow line more closely.

Something you’re guaranteed to see in HDR mode is vividly saturated color. Not only does the 34GK950F cover more of DCI-P3 than most monitors, it pushes the saturation levels as brightness rises. When playing games or watching movies, color was vibrant and bold. Whites looked a little blue, but reds and greens popped in a way few monitors can match. While overall HDR accuracy is just OK, the effect has a solid impact.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: All Monitor Content

25 comments
    Your comment
  • mischon123
    -No HDR calibration option
    -Slight gamma errors

    So its a faulty product and the panel is overdriven thus creating the many probs? Thats what a 4.5/editors choice means? Lucky Goldstar peddling off surplus in an advertorial.
  • Tanquen
    Is it flat? Nope.
    Is 35"+? Nope.
    Is it 16:10 or 16:9? Nope.
    HDMI 2.1? Nope.
    Is it full 10bit? ?

    I guess that is just never going to happen as long as they can cut a display in half and sell it for more. :(
  • drivinfast247
    If this works with Gsync I might pick one up.
  • drivinfast247
    Quote:
    Is it flat? Nope. Is 35"+? Nope. Is it 16:10 or 16:9? Nope. HDMI 2.1? Nope. Is it full 10bit? ? I guess that is just never going to happen as long as they can cut a display in half and sell it for more. :(

    By yourself a 4k TV if you want those options. Or wait for the BFGDs to be released.
  • AgentLozen
    Mischon123 said:
    -No HDR calibration option -Slight gamma errors So its a faulty product and the panel is overdriven thus creating the many probs? Thats what a 4.5/editors choice means? Lucky Goldstar peddling off surplus in an advertorial.


    Fair enough. If a product is bad then it shouldn't get a good review. I understand your sentiment.

    I've pasted the list of Pros that the author gave for this review below. The cons are also down there. Read through the list one more time and weigh each of the points for Pros and for Cons. How important is each point to the overall monitor experience? Then tell me what kind of score you would have given this monitor based on the weight of its Pros and its Cons.

    Pros:
    Out-of-box color accuracy
    Accurate sRGB mode
    DCI-P3 color
    144Hz refresh rate
    FreeSync 2, HDR10 support
    Good blur reduction

    Cons:
    No HDR calibration option
    Slight gamma errors

    Tanquen said:
    Is it flat? Nope. Is 35"+? Nope. Is it 16:10 or 16:9? Nope. HDMI 2.1? Nope. Is it full 10bit? ? I guess that is just never going to happen as long as they can cut a display in half and sell it for more. :(


    Hey Tanquan. Please read this as being sincere when I say I looked through your list. I wanted to address your complaints with this monitor.

    DrivinFast247 touched on this already, but I wanted to elaborate. Let's say that you were shopping for a new pet and you read a review for a turtle. In the comment section of the turtle review you list out the qualities that you think a pet should have:

    -Does it have fur? Nope.
    -Does it bark? Nope.
    -Does it have paws? Nope.
    -Does it eat dog food? Nope?

    The reason you're so disappointed is because you're looking for a dog. Not a turtle.

    Returning back to the reality of this article, this is an ultra wide display and a good one at that. If you're looking for a big, flat, 16:9 screen then you want a 4K consumer TV. The kind of display reviewed here is only going to disappoint you.
  • groundhogdog
    I am struggling to understand why you didnt add any testing or reference for G-Sync functionality with this very popular Freesync monitor. It would clearly be one of the largest points of interest for buyers, and the review is published weeks after testing that would have been possible.
  • moogleslam
    Agree with others. We need G-Sync testing.
  • rhysiam
    Am I right in saying we've yet to see any ultrawides with FALD and sufficient brightness for a better than HDR400 rating?

    This monitor is almost exactly what I'm looking for, but if I'm spending big on a high end display I really want 5 years from it. HDR implementation in games is very much early days right now, but I expect to see this improve over the next two years and I'm not sure HDR400 is going to cut it.

    144hz, 1440p ultrawide, Freesync 2 is perfect. Even the 8bit FRC is fine by me. I just want a better HDR implementation.

    Am I the only one?
  • CircuitWIzardry
    I agree with the others requesting G-Sync Testing? Since support for Freesync is clearly available now with Nvidia cards, not testing this is a huge oversight!
  • ubercake
    Me too. I would like to see G-sync tests with the slo-mo capture to determine if any flickering or tearing is occurring. I think the G-sync test should be a new standard test with any freesync monitor to determine compatibility.

    There's tons of value in it because it could potentially save people hundreds of dollars for similarly sped'd freesync monitors compared to their G-sync counterparts.
  • stefpats
    Brightness 200 nits 44
    Brightness 120 nits 18
    Brightness 100 nits 12
    Brightness 80 nits 5
    Brightness 50 nits 0

    these are the calibration result,what setting does apply on the only brightness the monitor has? can someone explain?
  • ixnooky
    I have this monitor, and it is the bomb. Probably the best ultrawide currently available imho. I don't understand the comments above, why isn't it flat, why this, why that, why do you bag on a product if you know what it is and it's not for you? Anyway, reddit has some comments from folks that have enabled the new nvidia drivers and claim it functions flawlessly, it would have been nice to see it in the review also. I have an AMD card, so I am not in that camp, but so far it has been beautiful and I've noticed any input lag etc.
  • lpkn2017
    warranty is not 3 year. it's 1 year only (which imo looks extremely short for such expensive monitor)
  • drivinfast247
    Quote:
    warranty is not 3 year. it's 1 year only (which imo looks extremely short for such expensive monitor)
    luckily Amazon has a 4 year replacement plan for less than $13.00.
  • lpkn2017
    im more concerned about slow g2g response time. tft central review says it has 8ms+ of true g2g response time even with overdrive and it's more suitable for 120hz instead of 144hz
  • Geezer760
    Too Expensive.
  • ddferrari
    Why is there no comparison to the current champ- the Dell Alienware AW3418DW?
  • drivinfast247
    370387 said:
    Why is there no comparison to the current champ- the Dell Alienware AW3418DW?


    Spec wise the LG is better. Higher refresh rate, brighter and HDR.
  • drivinfast247
    278946 said:
    Too Expensive.


    Compared to what, other 144hz, ultrawide HDR, Freesync2 monitors??
  • ddferrari
    True, but the Dell has Gsync, which will cater to much more of the gpu owners out there (75% nV vs AMD ??). And frankly, when I'm sitting in a dark room and gaming, I don't want MORE brightness lol.
  • ixnooky
    The LG has a Gsync version of the same monitor with slightly worse specs. People have been reporting the the Freesync version with the new nvidia drivers works very well. I'd buy the cheaper Freesync version (if I didn't already have it!), or would recommend going that route, and it's cheaper. Have I said how much I love this monitor?
  • drivinfast247
    The Gsync version is not HDR.
  • VoiceOfReason116
    Just want to add my voice to those dying to know how it works with g-sync
  • ixnooky
    Amazon reviews have one good review of a person running the Freesync version with a 2080Ti and claiming it is as good as Gsync and HDR works.