More New 5K Monitors Announced!

[Pezimak]

LG have announced 3 new monitors, 27” Mini LED 5K with hi refresh rate and dual mode, a Tandem OLED 39” Curved widescreen 5K dual mode, and one 52” curved dual mode but they do not state the panel tech so I assume LCD:

LG Unveils UltraGear evo, Redefining 5K Gaming With World's First AI Upscaling Technology | LG NEWSROOM

Expanding the Boundaries of High-Resolution Gaming With a New Lineup Spanning OLED, New MiniLED and Ultra-Wide Formats SEOUL, Dec. 26, 2025 — LG Electronics (LG) announced today the global launch of i

www.lgnewsroom.com

If I could fit that 39” one in, that tandem OLED could massively reduce burn in with static windows and taskbars. All monitors have new Ai upscaling tech too.

But we can all look at that new 27” and think Studio Display 2…..

 

[Dark-Signature]

Only the 27" monitor is likely to be a true 5K display, as the others are only slightly wider 4K displays because they do not offer 218 PPI!

 

[Pezimak]

Only the 27" monitor is likely to be a true 5K display, as the others are only slightly wider 4K displays because they do not offer 218 PPI!

No, they are 5K, the resolution is 5K, whether they are wider or not makes no different to the fact the resolution is still 5K, the PPI adjusts with screen size no matter the resolution. If they were 4K the PPI would be lower.

Regardless the new 27” is most likely the new Studio Display 2 panel, if LG is the supplier of course.

 

[Dark-Signature]

No, they are 5K, the resolution is 5K, whether they are wider or not makes no different to the fact the resolution is still 5K, the PPI adjusts with screen size no matter the resolution. If they were 4K the PPI would be lower.

Regardless the new 27” is most likely the new Studio Display 2 panel, if LG is the supplier of course.

Oh, cool... back in 2006, I already had a 5K monitor with a resolution of 5120x160 (one hundred sixty) pixels... ROTFL. Sorry, but your explanation isn't enough for me. They are and remain merely 4K displays with a low resolution of less than 220 PPI (except perhaps the 27" 5K monitor). The rest is and remains uninteresting if you want to use high-resolution displays.

 

[Pezimak]

Oh, cool... back in 2006, I already had a 5K monitor with a resolution of 5120x160 (one hundred sixty) pixels... ROTFL. Sorry, but your explanation isn't enough for me. They are and remain merely 4K displays with a low resolution of less than 220 PPI (except perhaps the 27" 5K monitor). The rest is and remains uninteresting if you want to use high-resolution displays.

You can think what you like, still doesn’t change the ‘fact’ they are 5K resolution and not 4K.

 

[maflynn]

No, they are 5K, the resolution is 5K,

Sure they are.

Most people use the resolution to define if a monitor is 5k

 

[MarkC426]

Sure they are.

Most people use the resolution to define if a monitor is 5k
View attachment 2590944

Merry Xmas everyone…🎅

This is what bugs me….. 😄
A screen which displays 5120x2880 pixels (in full resolution) is 5k, therefore i can have numerous applications all visible. But a 5k hiDPI screen running at 2560x1440 may look sharper, but i can’t fit as many apps on screen…🫣

I currently have two QHD 27” monitors, but am toying with an ultrawide 5120x1440, as they just look sooo nice (does macOS work nicely with this?), or maybe a 32-37” 4k at full Rez.
Can’t decide whether everything would still be small though at native Rez on a 32-37…..🤔

More space is more important to me than clarity.
Back in the old days i upgraded from a 17” to a 19”, then a 24”, then 27”, each time gaining a higher resolution and more screen space (as pixels where pixels), since ‘retina’ every 27” display usually defaults to QHD.

 

[maflynn]

5k hiDPI screen running at 2560x1440 may look sharper, but i can’t fit as many apps on screen…🫣

I've never heard of that, though I'm far from a monitor expert. Do you have a model, or monitor that does that?

 

[Dark-Signature]

Sure they are.

Most people use the resolution to define if a monitor is 5k
View attachment 2590944

Exactly, people who aren't very familiar with monitors tend to naively assume that a monitor is a 5K monitor as soon as the horizontal resolution exceeds 5,000 pixels. Then we'll soon have 10k/12k monitors with resolutions of 10,240 x 2160. What nonsense. Think about the definitions you're clinging to!

The author of your frequently referenced wiki article will soon realize that this definition is not helpful unless other parameters are mentioned or the PPI value is simply stated. Anyone who fails to understand this has immediately disqualified themselves from participating in discussions about high-resolution displays!

 

[MarkC426]

I've never heard of that, though I'm far from a monitor expert. Do you have a model, or monitor that does that?

This may be my ‘old school’ ignorance….
I am used to larger screens having larger real estate (more pixels and more space).
If I open Safari (for example) on my QHD at full screen it will look exactly the same size on ‘5k retina’ screen (unless set to native resolution, which would show it at a much smaller size).

Apple’s displays/iMacs tend to be 27” looks like 2560x1440, although doubled pixels for crisper image.
But you only have same space as a QHD 2560x1440 pixel screen.

 

[maflynn]

Exactly, people who aren't very familiar with monitors tend to naively assume that a monitor is a 5K monitor as soon as the horizontal resolution exceeds 5,000 pixels.

I think you're missing the point when reviewers, retailers, tech sites, and consumers all consider 5k to be defined by the resolution and not including PPI, then that's what it is, a resolution based standard.

The author of your frequently referenced wiki article will soon realize that this definition is not helpful unless other parameters are mentioned or the PPI value is simply stated.

Here's other examples of definitions, and I failed to see any reference to PPI (I'm not perfect I could have missed it)

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/5k-definition,37643.html

The 4 Best 5k Monitors of 2025

The best 5k monitor we've tested is the Dell U4025QW. It has a 5120x2160 resolution, otherwise known as 5k2k, making it an ultrawide display.

www.rtings.com

Do you have any links the state to be a 5k monitor you have have at least 218 PPI?

 

[Arctic Moose]

The author of your frequently referenced wiki article will soon realize that this definition is not helpful unless other parameters are mentioned or the PPI value is simply stated.

Are you suggesting that 5120x2880@27” should be considered 5K, but that 5120x2880@32” should not? If not, what would you call it?

 

[MarkC426]

Are you suggesting that 5120x2880@27” should be considered 5K, but that 5120x2880@32” should not? If not, what would you call it?

5k is 5120x2880 irrelevant of screen size.
Cinemas show 4k, but their screens are a bit bigger than 27”…..

 

[Arctic Moose]

5k is 5120x2880

I am aware.

I was responding to @Dark-Signature who appears to believe that 5K-ness is PPI-dependent.

(I was also curious if that means my 3840×2160 77” TV is not 4K, or is it perhaps only 4K if I sit far enough away from it?)

 

[Hajj.david]

Only the 27" monitor is likely to be a true 5K display, as the others are only slightly wider 4K displays because they do not offer 218 PPI!

PPI is irrelevant to the discussion. A 5k display has a 5k resolution regardless of screensize. You are thinking of "retina" monkier that Apple uses which is "high enough of a PPI to not notice pixels at the appropriate viewing distance."

 

[the future]

If you hear/read 5K, you expect 5120x2880 pixels. So yes, > 27“ 16:9 displays are still 5K displays, no matter the PPI. But no, ultrawide displays with 5120 pixels horizontally but < 2880 pixels vertically are not real 5K displays.

 

[bigglow]

My eyesight's happy with 109ppi but because I want 32" display that is macOS compatible then I'm forced into a 32" 6K display at 218ppi.

Now, using 109ppi on a 32" display would instead be 3K in resolution.

 

[mstso]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we proudly present the panel of the upcoming Studio Display 2...

 

[zeropoint88]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we proudly present the panel of the upcoming Studio Display 2...

If the past is anything to go by, then yes.

165hz with 2304 mini led dimming zones and over 1000 nits in hdr. Potentially quite the monitor. Let’s see what LG’s execution looks like and how Apple implement it as ASD2

 

[Abydos]

ppi argument sounds similar to the dpi which arose in printing; some substance, some hot air

 

[Pezimak]

If you hear/read 5K, you expect 5120x2880 pixels. So yes, > 27“ 16:9 displays are still 5K displays, no matter the PPI. But no, ultrawide displays with 5120 pixels horizontally but < 2880 pixels vertically are not real 5K displays.

Sure, but the new LG monitors have not had their vertical resolutions posted anywhere, so I go by the fact it has been posted as 5K and that the screen height is the same as a 32” monitor as that is all LG have stated so far. They only announced them today!

Ah according to this it is 5120 by 2160 so a bit less then the 2880:

http://tftcentral.co.uk/news/the-lg-39gx950b-is-the-world-first-39-5k2k-oled-monitor-to-be-announced still more then you usually get

 

[PaulD-UK]

ppi matters with multiple monitors, because dragging a window between screens with the same ppi doesn’t resize the screen image.

218ppi matters with MacOS, because that’s what Apple has chosen to optimise their Retina™ viewing on their own external monitors.

2880+ pixel vertical resolution on 27+” monitors matters for use with MacOS because that’s the minimum for Retina™ viewing (4 screen pixels per 1 image pixel).

Any 5K2K widescreen monitor will only have a vertical resolution of 1080p if used in MacOS Retina™ mode.
Which isn’t practical for workflow reasons.

Running a 5K2K monitor at a fractional resolution less than 2:1 is compromised by Apple’s restrictive limitations, caused by their frame buffer management choices - where they favour their own products.
The result of this compromises text clarity when compared to the 2:1 Retina experience.

This is a MacOS thing, and MR is a Mac discussion forum. 🤨

So, as @Dark-Signature posted, “Only the 27" monitor is likely to be a true 5K display, as the others are only slightly wider 4K displays because they do not offer 218 PPI!”.

 

[Dark-Signature]

Sure, but the new LG monitors have not had their vertical resolutions posted anywhere, so I go by the fact it has been posted as 5K and that the screen height is the same as a 32” monitor as that is all LG have stated so far. They only announced them today!

Ah according to this it is 5120 by 2160 so a bit less then the 2880:

http://tftcentral.co.uk/news/the-lg-39gx950b-is-the-world-first-39-5k2k-oled-monitor-to-be-announced still more then you usually get

Anyone familiar with monitor technology will know that the 39“ and 52” LG monitors are not particularly special, except for their refresh rates, because the designation 5K2K (mentioned a dozen times) clearly indicates that they are basically 4K monitors with slightly more pixels horizontally. The 27" LG will almost certainly have a 5K3K panel and thus meet the 218PPI requirement.

 

[the future]

Sure, but the new LG monitors have not had their vertical resolutions posted anywhere, so I go by the fact it has been posted as 5K and that the screen height is the same as a 32” monitor as that is all LG have stated so far. They only announced them today!

Ah according to this it is 5120 by 2160 so a bit less then the 2880:

http://tftcentral.co.uk/news/the-lg-39gx950b-is-the-world-first-39-5k2k-oled-monitor-to-be-announced still more then you usually get

Yeah, LG are at least transparent with this as they call these kind of displays „5K2K“ to differentiate them from full 5K displays.

FWIW I have a 34“ LG 5K2K display which has 164 PPI and is just fine. Would I prefer 220 PPI? Sure. But getting an ultrawide was more important for me and this was (is) the best one yet, PPI-wise.

 

[the future]

Running a 5K2K monitor at a fractional resolution less than 2:1 is compromised by Apple’s restrictive limitations, caused by their frame buffer management choices - where they favour their own products.
The result of this compromises text clarity when compared to the 2:1 Retina experience.

Theoretically, this is true. In real life, I find 164 PPI (and fractional scaling) just fine. And I work with text all day.