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

[kasakka]

The problem is that prior G9 models 3440x1440 @ 240hz doesn't even work (it isn't even a option in the EDID). These DSC monitors aren't really happy with custom resolutions. You can read on reddit all the work arounds people have had to use or try but it ends up breaking HDR or VRR.

Good to know! Seems that it does behave a bit weird if DSC is in use. I had no problem with this when using the CRG9 but since that tops out at 120 Hz without DSC I guess that's why it worked.

I'm hoping Samsung just includes some of those resolutions out of the box.

Samsung does these incremental improvements then never ports them to their older models. As an example, the CRG9's preset functionality was pretty much garbage - you could not assign most of the OSD options to the presets. Then the Neo G9 (ugh, why could they not call the new one Neo G10 or Neo G9 8K or something?) fixes that where most settings can be stored in the preset. Then weirdly they seem to have removed this functionality completely from the Neo G8. I hope they don't do that for the new Neo G9 as those presets are useful.

 

[kasakka]

One of the LTT guys testing out the Neo G9 at CES. Unfortunately nothing more than like personal descriptions of how it seems and no new details really. But it does seem a lot like two Neo G8's stitched together.

I don't know if the last chapter in the video has ended up in the wrong video, but he says these would have Philips Hue support and some sort of "take a portion of the screen and enlarge it or cast it to a different display" thing which is interesting. They cast a minimap from Fortnite to the 43" G70 model under a TV.

 

[Blade-Runner]

Good to know! Seems that it does behave a bit weird if DSC is in use. I had no problem with this when using the CRG9 but since that tops out at 120 Hz without DSC I guess that's why it worked.

I'm hoping Samsung just includes some of those resolutions out of the box.

Samsung does these incremental improvements then never ports them to their older models. As an example, the CRG9's preset functionality was pretty much garbage - you could not assign most of the OSD options to the presets. Then the Neo G9 (ugh, why could they not call the new one Neo G10 or Neo G9 8K or something?) fixes that where most settings can be stored in the preset. Then weirdly they seem to have removed this functionality completely from the Neo G8. I hope they don't do that for the new Neo G9 as those presets are useful.

Having gone back and looked at user complaints about the G9 one of the the biggest gripe appears to have been Samsung's failure to include native 21:9 presets in the EDID at release, which is pretty fucking stupid and unforgivable considering there is absolutely no reason why 3440x1440 isn't a viable resolution for the panel (doesn't surprise me though considering Samsung's shitty engineering in other products). From the latest manual it now looks the firmware has been updated to support 3440x1440 at 120 hz.

I won't be touching the G9 57" unless it supports 5K2K at 120hz out of the box. For the amount of money Samsung will be demanding for this monitor, there is no way I will accept fucking around with custom resolutions.

Edit: also seems that Samsung's quality control for monitors in general is atrocious, I might wait for several model revisions and firmware updates before buying anything.

 

[kasakka]

So I had a bright idea: "Hey, I have two identical 28" 4K 144 Hz IPS Samsung G70A displays, let's see if I can get these running in Nvidia Surround!"

Well, I had to disable VRR and drop them both to 60 Hz first, then connect both over Displayport until NVSurround started accepting the configuration. After that I was able to set it to 7680x2160 @ 120 Hz.

So I decided to test a number of games and see how they would perform at such a high res.

Test setup:

• Intel 13600K
• PNY 4090 Epic-X, undervolted, runs at about 2700 MHz clocks
• 32 GB DDR5-6000
• 2 Tb Samsung 980 Pro NVME
• All games are running at about highest graphics settings.
• Raytracing is enabled if available.
• I tried to pick a "demanding" location for SOTR and Witcher 3
• For Q2 and Doom Eternal I just picked a "stable but somewhat demanding" location with no enemies etc.
• Screenshots show the location used for testing. Uploading them here seems to have turned their quality to crap.

Caveats:

7680x2160 3840x2160 were tested in borderless windowed mode. Exclusive fullscreen tends to break NVSurround but does not perform better nowadays.

To test running at 5120x2160 and 6144x2160, I had to run the games windowed because adding custom resolutions with NVSurround doesn't work (or might be tricky).
To set the games to these specific resolutions, I used Fancyzones to define presets with 5120x2160 and 6144x2160 zones where I could drag the game window to resize it.

Running in windowed mode instead of borderless window has some performance penalties so with real custom resolutions you would get a bit better performance.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Resolution	Quality	Framerate (average)
7680x2160	DLSS Quality	140
	DLSS Balanced	155
	Native (SMAA2X)	100
6144x2160	DLSS Quality	150
	Native (SMAA2X)	110
5120x2160	DLSS Quality	172
	Native (SMAA2X)	130
3840x2160	DLSS Quality	200
	Native (SMAA2X)	170

Witcher 3 Next gen

I tested only 8Kx2K and 4K here because it otherwise took too much time to go through all the options.

Resolution	Quality	Framerate (average)
7680x2160	DLSS Quality + Frame generation	64
	DLSS Balanced + FG	70
	DLSS Performance + FG	80
	DLSS Quality	42
	DLSS Balanced	48
	DLSS Performance	53
	Native (TAAU)	28
3840x2160	DLSS Quality + Frame generation	100
	DLSS Balanced + FG	110
	DLSS Performance + FG	120
	DLSS Quality	66
	DLSS Balanced	70
	DLSS Performance	74
	Native (TAAU)	45

Quake 2 RTX

First level, outside area with exploding barrels.

Resolution	Quality	Framerate (average)
7680x2160	Dynamic resolution scale, 120 fps target = 58% scale	120
	Native	46
6144x2160	Native	58
5120x2160	Native	65
3840x2160	Native	88

Doom Eternal

Spaceship hub level, on top of stairs facing the main bridge (mission select etc)

Resolution	Quality	Framerate (average)
7680x2160	DLSS Quality	135
	DLSS Balanced	144
	Native	110
6144x2160	DLSS Quality	150
	Native	126
5120x2160	DLSS Quality	169
	Native	145
3840x2160	DLSS Quality	224
	Native	185

So with a 4090, gaming at 7680x2160 is totally viable! Sure, it's not 200+ fps but even super heavy games like the Witcher 3 next gen can be made at least playable and this was without dropping any details. Realistically, more modern games would be run at 6144x2160 or 5120x2160 to minimize FOV distortion issues of the super ultrawide form factor.

 

[kasakka]

Found a bit more footage of the 57" Neo G95NC. The only interesting thing here is the size comparison vs the 49" G9. The 57" model does not look that much bigger - a bit taller but width seems quite similar.

It also looks like they keep that weird "not quite smooth" curvature to it where most of the curvature is in the center and then it kind of flattens out at the very edges.

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

Found a bit more footage of the 57" Neo G95NC. The only interesting thing here is the size comparison vs the 49" G9. The 57" model does not look that much bigger - a bit taller but width seems quite similar.

It also looks like they keep that weird "not quite smooth" curvature to it where most of the curvature is in the center and then it kind of flattens out at the very edges.

Not sure why they make the curve like that.

Still no hint of when they'll start selling these.

 

[kasakka]

Not sure why they make the curve like that.

Still no hint of when they'll start selling these.

I assume it's a technical limitation somehow.

I'd just like them to release the full specs and manual to know what it supports over HDMI 2.1.

 

[SoCali]

I don't think its any technical limitation. If you think about it, a uniform curve would greatly limit the ideal seating position due to the edges flaring in closer to you and as a result causing gamma loss from the more extreme horizontal viewing angle.

The reason all curved monitors are curved as they are with a center pinch and flatter sides is likely to balance many factors like above.

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

I don't think its any technical limitation. If you think about it, a uniform curve would greatly limit the ideal seating position due to the edges flaring in closer to you and as a result causing gamma loss from the more extreme horizontal viewing angle.

The reason all curved monitors are curved as they are with a center pinch and flatter sides is likely to balance many factors like above.

My LG 40WP95C has a uniform curve. However, the curvature is lower than what Samsung does, so maybe that has something to do with it.

 

[kasakka]

I don't think its any technical limitation. If you think about it, a uniform curve would greatly limit the ideal seating position due to the edges flaring in closer to you and as a result causing gamma loss from the more extreme horizontal viewing angle.

The reason all curved monitors are curved as they are with a center pinch and flatter sides is likely to balance many factors like above.

I don't think that's the case. the G9, current and upcoming, only slightly straightens out. I firmly expect it's some sort of production related compromise. I think a uniform curve would help with image quality at the very edges since they would face more towards you. The seating position on these screens is already kinda limited.

 

[Vega]

Lower failure rate to heat bend only the center versus the whole LCD panel. Saving costs = more profit.

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

Lower failure rate to heat bend only the center versus the whole LCD panel. Saving costs = more profit.

That's a possibility. I wonder why they bend it so much, though. The curvature looks excessive. I wish they just made it uniform with less curvature.

 

[Xar]

SD should've opted for 49" 7680x2160 QD-OLED instead of crappy VA panel, even if it's a FALD-QD one.

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

SD should've opted for 49" 7680x2160 QD-OLED instead of crappy VA panel, even if it's a FALD-QD one.

The 57" will be great for productivity. I’m glad the text quality won’t be compromised with an OLED panel. VA is much better than OLED for that.

 

[kasakka]

SD should've opted for 49" 7680x2160 QD-OLED instead of crappy VA panel, even if it's a FALD-QD one.

I don't think they can make that yet. We are only getting a 5120x1440 QD-OLED this year.

I also appreciate they went for the larger size, that's going to be quite immersive.

 

[kasakka]

Found a pic with it next to what I think is the previous Neo G9 model. The curvature at least seems to be more than the OLED G9.

Viewing angles can be deceiving but it doesn't look massively larger physically than the 49" model. At probably that viewing distance difference it would work quite nicely at 125 or 150% scaling.

It might also be just a difference in settings, one running in HDR and one in SDR or various other factors but the 57" model looks much brighter, especially noticeable in the red building.

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

I believe the one in front is the upcoming OLED G9.

 

[james2400]

Did they fix the HDR tone mapping that has plagued the Odyssey line up?

Have a Neo G9 49 inch and the HDR pales in comparison to my Asus 32UCG despite claiming to have *2000 nit peak* and a further 900 dimming zones.

 

[kasakka]

I believe the one in front is the upcoming OLED G9.

I don't think it is. This seems to be from that same event I linked a short video earlier is this thread. The OLED G9 is far less curved.

 

[kasakka]

Did they fix the HDR tone mapping that has plagued the Odyssey line up?

Have a Neo G9 49 inch and the HDR pales in comparison to my Asus 32UCG despite claiming to have *2000 nit peak* and a further 900 dimming zones.

Samsung's 2000 nits peak brightness figures are straight up bullshit and false advertising when they don't tell what situation allows them to reach that and no reviewer has managed such a feat.

There is basically no info about the 57" model at this point besides what was available at CES 2023. My assumption is that the Neo G9 57" will perform a lot like 2x Neo G8 models. I'm hoping it would actually have peak/sustained brightness closer to the Neo G9 49" as it can get brighter.

Your Asus actually has more dimming zones in the same screen area. If the Neo G9 49" is equivalent to 2x 27" 1440p screens, that would be 1024 dimming zones per half. Obviously that's not a big difference to 1152 on the Asus, but the intended purpose and price range of the two is way different so it's not exactly a fair comparison. The Asus costs nearly 5000 € in my country whereas the Neo G9 49" can be had for ~1700 €. The Asus is aimed at professionals so accuracy etc are going to be more important factors than the more general purpose and gaming oriented Samsung.

Samsung definitely does some weird things when it comes to following the EOTF curve. Even their QLED TVs have similar shenanigans. Why, I have no idea. Maybe it's not putting in the time and effort to make them more accurate or it's a compromise to allow better performance in some other area like to avoid blooming as much as possible. Samsung Display seems to be capable of making some rather good panels but then Samsung's TV and monitor divisions that make those panels into consumer products end up messing things up with variety of firmware issues etc.

That still doesn't put me off from looking to buy the Neo G9 57" G95NC. Pricing and capabilities over HDMI 2.1 will be a factor. The way I see it, it's the only monitor that combines everything I need:

• 4K sharpness for desktop use.
• Tons of desktop space.
• Ultrawide high refresh rate gaming.
• HDR capability that is at minimum quite alright even if it's not best in class.
• Picture by Picture mode for 21:9 + 11:9 or 2x 16:9.

I used the Samsung CRG9 for a few years as my desktop monitor and my only real complaints were the HDR capabilities (crap local dimming) and "only" 1440p resolution. Everything else I can file under "quirks and compromises."

 

[Bigmonitorguy]

This monitor will be worth a try when it comes out. Not sure when that will be. Maybe towards the end of the year?

Samsung's record with their high-end monitors makes it very likely that there will be significant issues with this one as well, but there will be no alternative monitor with these specs, so still worth a try.

 

[kasakka]

This monitor will be worth a try when it comes out. Not sure when that will be. Maybe towards the end of the year?

Samsung's record with their high-end monitors makes it very likely that there will be significant issues with this one as well, but there will be no alternative monitor with these specs, so still worth a try.

Yeah I agree, I expect it might have some issues. Ideally it's basically iterative from their previous models so they could take the known issues and try to improve upon things.

I'm hoping it would come out by summer but that might be too optimistic.

 

[Bigc208]

I had the 49 inch but felt the height wasn’t enough. Looks like 57 inch might just hit the spot for my flightsim. Going to give it a try when it gets released.

 

[-snoopi-]

Any idea when release window is?

I am super keen on it. I loved my Neo G9 49" whilst I had it, but I sold it due to the narrow size.

So the 57" might be more enticing for the likes of me.

 

[kasakka]

Any idea when release window is?

I am super keen on it. I loved my Neo G9 49" whilst I had it, but I sold it due to the narrow size.

So the 57" might be more enticing for the likes of me.

Zero info. My expectation is summer at the earliest.