Hands-On With LG's $1,500 34WK95U UltraWide 5K Display

At CES in January, LG debuted a new UltraWide 5K display, the 34WK95U, which just recently launched. We managed to get our hands on one of the new super huge monitors, and we checked it out in our latest YouTube video.

Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.

LG's UltraWide 5K display is far from cheap, priced at $1,499, which makes it more expensive than many of Apple's notebooks and the new Mac mini. For that price, it includes a 34-inch Ultrawide 21:9 Nano IPS display, a 5120 x 2160 resolution with a 60Hz refresh date, HDR support, and Thunderbolt 3 connectivity.


Design wise, the display features a curved base with height and tilt adjustment features, with several ports available on the back. There's a Thunderbolt 3 port, two USB-A ports, a DisplayPort, 2 HDMI ports, a USB Type B port, and a 3.5mm headphone jack. It supports up to 85W of power delivery, enough to power Apple's 15-inch MacBook Pro, and there are a set of 5W speakers at the bottom.


There's a single control button on the display that you'll need to use if you want to adjust features like brightness or speaker volume, with controls not available in macOS.

You can connect LG's UltraWide display to any of Apple's Thunderbolt 3-compatible Macs, including the new MacBook Air, the new Mac mini, and recent MacBook Pro models.

At 34 inches, the UltraWide monitor offers up a huge amount of screen real estate to work with, ideal for photographers, designers, and videographers. The 5K display of the monitor looks great, and while we didn't think it quite matched the crispness of the iMac Pro, we appreciated the extra space.


It's worth noting, however, that at its full 5120 x 2160 resolution spread over 34 inches, everything ends up looking quite tiny, but running at 2560 x 1080 as a Retina display results in content appearing too large. As a result, the best solution is to run at a scaled sweet spot resolution of 3360 x 1417, which gives you ton of screen real estate, and despite the scaling, content still looks good.

Some customers who have purchased the UltraWide 5K Display have run into compatibility issues with the 2018 MacBook Pro models equipped with 560X graphics cards, with an update in the works to fix it. We tested the UltraWide 5K Display with a MacBook Pro model equipped with a 555X graphics card and found similar issues, although Apple has just released macOS 10.14.2 and the release notes mention a fix for what sounds like a similar but not identical issue, so we'll be checking to see if performance improves for us.

The LG 34WK95U UltraWide 5K Display is undoubtedly a gorgeous display, but its high $1,500 price tag means that it's firmly aimed at creative professionals and not for the average consumer. Combine that price tag with the compatibility issues we and others have run into, and it's hard to recommend this display, at least until we're confident Apple and/or LG have the kinks worked out.

What do you think of LG's UltraWide 5K Display? Let us know in the comments.

Note: LG provided MacRumors with 34WK95U UltraWide 5K Display for the purpose of this video, and it was returned following the conclusion of filming. No other compensation was received.

Tag: LG


Top Rated Comments

(View all)
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:41 pm
Why are you calling it 5K display, when it has a 4K resolution, with slightly increased width? This screen has 33% less pixels than a real 5K monitor (5120x2880)
Rating: 7 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:28 pm
As I sit in front of a 5k iMac, it's tough to imagine swapping to a larger screen with fewer pixels.
Rating: 4 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:29 pm

It's worth noting, however, that at its full 5120 x 2160 resolution spread over 34 inches, everything ends up looking quite tiny, but running at 2560 x 1080 as a Retina display results in content appearing too large. As a result, the best solution is to run at a scaled sweet spot resolution of 3360 x 1417, which gives you ton of screen real estate, and despite the scaling, content still looks good.

If I have to run it at a non-native resolution to get a decent amount of screen space, I'll pass. This doesn't have as good a resolution or pixel count as the cheaper LG Ultrafine 5K Display, or 5K iMacs from 2014 onward. Given the vertical resolution, I wouldn't even call it a true 5K display.
Rating: 4 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:23 pm
I've got my eye on the 38" Dell U3818DW. It's not retina, but at 3840 x 1600, this is potentially a more useful resolution. It's also about $600 dollars cheaper (it's frequently on Amazon for $899, though right now, the price is a bit over $1,000). It's curved, which for a large, ultrawide monitor should actually be a benefit. It's USB-C, not Thunderbolt, but it does delivery up to 100W power, and can operate as a KVM switch if you connect two computers to it.

So a single USB-C cable connected to a MacBook would give you power, display, speakers, and whatever USB devices you have connected the monitor.

It's basically one-and-a-half 30" Cinema displays, in that it's got 50% more horizontal resolution with the same vertical resolution. Compared to a 27" monitor (like the Apple Thunderbolt display), you've got 50% more horizontal resolution and 11% more vertical resolution.
Rating: 4 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:26 pm
I don't get why you would spend $1500 on a 5120x2160 when you can get a 5120x2880 (more of a true 5K) display for $200-300 less. Maybe because this one is bigger? But I don't see the point when that makes it less of a retina display and more of something in-between that doesn't seem ideal if you have to use weird scaling. It's just like you blew up a 5K display and then chopped the bottom off. Doesn't seem useful to me.

I hope that when Apple comes out with their new display next year that it is 6K at 32", which is about the same PPI as the 5K iMac/iMac Pro.

Can I get a link to that monitor?

I'm not the person but I think I know what they're talking about. They use it a lot on LTT: https://www.amazon.com/Swift-PG27UQ-G-SYNC-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B07F1VGGLK
Rating: 4 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:14 pm

$1500 and it doesn't do at least 144hz via G-Sync or Freesync?

Useless.

This has to be a troll post.

I do not even know if there is 4K @ 144Hz, let alone 5K.


Even if someone dared to make that, it would be insanely expensive.

LOL, here you go. This is 4K at 27 inch, and is $2000: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236885

This LG would near $3000, LOL
Rating: 3 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 02:09 pm
5K screens are 2880p, a more suitable marketing term for this would be “4K-Ultrawide” since it’s basically just a standard 4K screen with som extra pixels on the sides.. :)
Rating: 3 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:26 pm
Just save some money and go with a 38" ultrawide with 3840x1600 resolution.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:12 pm
$1500 and it doesn't do at least 144hz via G-Sync or Freesync?

Useless.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
6 days ago at 12:17 pm

$1500 and it doesn't do at least 144hz via G-Sync or Freesync?

Useless.

The bandwidth limitations of Thunderbolt 3 make 5k at 144 Hz impossible currently. You would need a dual-channel TB3 connection, which to my knowledge does not exist.
Rating: 2 Votes
[ Read All Comments ]