This collaborative space allows users to contribute additional information, tips, and insights to enhance the original deal post. Feel free to share your knowledge and help fellow shoppers make informed decisions.
Model: onn. 49" Curved Dual FHD (3840 x 1080p) 144Hz 1ms Gaming Monitor with Cables, Black, New
Deal History
Deal History includes data from multiple reputable stores, such as Best Buy, Target, and Walmart. The lowest price among stores for a given day is selected as the "Sale Price".
Sale Price does not include sale prices at Amazon unless a deal was posted by a community member.
Close. At 49", it's the same size as those 49" 5120x1440 higher res super ultrawide, which is equivalent to having two 27" 1440p next to each other. So this monitor is two 27" 1080p.
the screen is only 14" tall... this monitor is essentially the same as having two 24" monitors next to each other. having 4k res on a 24" screen is silly imho.
I have a similar 49" monitor that is 1440p. While 4k is ridiculous, i almost feel like 1080p is equally ridiculous. I'd say if someone can't afford a 1440p 49" a smaller 1440p would provide a better experience than this.
I've had an ONN set on my wall for the last 3 years. Works flawlessly. Don't know why folks are saying it's a crappy brand. Why? Because it's Walmart's own?
Objectively through testing. You're evaluation is subjective from ownership. Both can be right. You can have a good one (because you either can't tell or don't care about or know the difference between a higher quality item OR you just got a good one OR you can tell the difference AND got a good one). Either way, I'll take rigorous testing over anecdotal evidence any day.
I have a similar 49" monitor that is 1440p. While 4k is ridiculous, i almost feel like 1080p is equally ridiculous. I'd say if someone can't afford a 1440p 49" a smaller 1440p would provide a better experience than this.
Quote
from talijay
:
Close. At 49", it's the same size as those 49" 5120x1440 higher res super ultrawide, which is equivalent to having two 27" 1440p next to each other. So this monitor is two 27" 1080p.
These 2 are right. This monitor has 81.41 pixels/dots per inch (PPI or DPI). Which is pretty much the same PPI as a 27" 1080p monitor.
PPI is a value you can use to determine the ideal ratio of resolution compared to overall size. And bigger isn't always better*. There is a sweet spot, which would vary depending on the distance you sit from your monitor. In addition, what you are looking at impacts the ideal PPI. For office productivity work, you normally want a little bit lower of a PPI. For gaming, the ideal PPI limit is more based on what quality your video card can provide.
If you get the chance, try to test out all 4 of these 16:9 monitor configurations. Use them at their native resolutions and without enabling OS scaling. They are fairly common and should give you a feel for a wide range of PPI values. You can use them as a guide without needing to to remember any PPI values.
24" @1080p (IMO, acceptable)
27" @1080p (IMO, bad. "Fuzzy" enough to be distracting.)
27" @1440p (IMO, great)
32" @2160p (IMO, bad. Uncomfortably "tiny".)
From there, any time you are monitor shopping you can just Google something like "monitor ppi calculator". You'll get search results for pages like this[sven.de] or this[calculatorsoup.com]. You can use a chart or calculator to quickly figure out what the PPI of a monitor is. Then compare it to the PPI of a monitor you think has a good ratio of being sharp without things looking too tiny.
For me, I remember that 27" @1440p is great, and that I should aim to stay above the PPI of 24" @1080p. So I can quickly look up that I like 109 PPI, and 92 PPI is less than I want but acceptable.
For reference, below is a cheat sheet of common monitor configurations and their PPI values.
PPI comparison
22" WSXGA+ (1680x1050) is 90.05 ppi
22" FullHD (1920x1080) is 100.13 ppi
24" FullHD (1920x1080) is 91.79 ppi
27" FullHD (1920x1080) is 81.59 ppi
27" WQHD (2560x1440) is 108.79 ppi
32" WQHD (2560x1440) is 91.79 ppi
32" UHD (3840x2160) is 137.68 ppi
37" UHD (3840x2160) is 119.08 ppi
40" UHD (3840x2160) is 110.15 ppi
43" UHD (3840x2160) is 102.46 ppi
47" UHD (3840x2160) is 93.74 ppi
29" UW-FHD (2560x1080) is 95.81 ppi
34" UW-FHD (2560x1080) is 81.72 ppi
34" UW-QHD (3440x1440) is 109.68 ppi
* Too high of a PPI results in "all of your icons and text looking tiny". This can be mitigated if your device provides scaling at the OS level. In these scenarios there is typically still the same ideal PPI. But in this case, it would be the PPI that your OS is scaling to.
For example, UHD/4K on a 27" screen is way too hard to read, IMO. I think that 1440p is much better. But scaling to 1440p on a 27" UHD/4k display can look fantastic.
Honest question: why do you think more pixels are silly as opposed to less pixels?
My $.02: Too many pixels are a luxury at best, and problematic at worst.
Luxury
Most of the time these days the OS handles scaling well enough. And in many cases, scaling down can make text even easier to read. But you are still scaling down to a lower virtual resolution and not getting more actual space. It's like buying a nicer truck that hauls the same amount as a cheaper one. It's not necessarily a bad purchase, but you are paying more to do the same job in the end.
Scaling does require more processing power from your computer. This can mean worse performance for your system overall or needing to purchase a more powerful hardware.
Problematic
Scaling a small amount can lead to less clarity.
When using multiple monitors, each with a different scaling percentage, things can get wonky when windows are dragged between displays.
P.S. I'm not arguing against getting more pixels, assuming it doesn't cause problems. But it's good to recognize where there are diminishing returns.
Like
Helpful
Funny
Not helpful
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!
Top Comments
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!
51 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
PPI is a value you can use to determine the ideal ratio of resolution compared to overall size. And bigger isn't always better*. There is a sweet spot, which would vary depending on the distance you sit from your monitor. In addition, what you are looking at impacts the ideal PPI. For office productivity work, you normally want a little bit lower of a PPI. For gaming, the ideal PPI limit is more based on what quality your video card can provide.
If you get the chance, try to test out all 4 of these 16:9 monitor configurations. Use them at their native resolutions and without enabling OS scaling. They are fairly common and should give you a feel for a wide range of PPI values. You can use them as a guide without needing to to remember any PPI values.
- 24" @1080p (IMO, acceptable)
- 27" @1080p (IMO, bad. "Fuzzy" enough to be distracting.)
- 27" @1440p (IMO, great)
- 32" @2160p (IMO, bad. Uncomfortably "tiny".)
From there, any time you are monitor shopping you can just Google something like "monitor ppi calculator". You'll get search results for pages like this [sven.de] or this [calculatorsoup.com]. You can use a chart or calculator to quickly figure out what the PPI of a monitor is. Then compare it to the PPI of a monitor you think has a good ratio of being sharp without things looking too tiny.For me, I remember that 27" @1440p is great, and that I should aim to stay above the PPI of 24" @1080p. So I can quickly look up that I like 109 PPI, and 92 PPI is less than I want but acceptable.
For reference, below is a cheat sheet of common monitor configurations and their PPI values.
PPI comparison
22" WSXGA+ (1680x1050) is 90.05 ppi
22" FullHD (1920x1080) is 100.13 ppi
24" FullHD (1920x1080) is 91.79 ppi
27" FullHD (1920x1080) is 81.59 ppi
27" WQHD (2560x1440) is 108.79 ppi
32" WQHD (2560x1440) is 91.79 ppi
32" UHD (3840x2160) is 137.68 ppi
37" UHD (3840x2160) is 119.08 ppi
40" UHD (3840x2160) is 110.15 ppi
43" UHD (3840x2160) is 102.46 ppi
47" UHD (3840x2160) is 93.74 ppi
29" UW-FHD (2560x1080) is 95.81 ppi
34" UW-FHD (2560x1080) is 81.72 ppi
34" UW-QHD (3440x1440) is 109.68 ppi
* Too high of a PPI results in "all of your icons and text looking tiny". This can be mitigated if your device provides scaling at the OS level. In these scenarios there is typically still the same ideal PPI. But in this case, it would be the PPI that your OS is scaling to.
For example, UHD/4K on a 27" screen is way too hard to read, IMO. I think that 1440p is much better. But scaling to 1440p on a 27" UHD/4k display can look fantastic.
Luxury
- Most of the time these days the OS handles scaling well enough. And in many cases, scaling down can make text even easier to read. But you are still scaling down to a lower virtual resolution and not getting more actual space. It's like buying a nicer truck that hauls the same amount as a cheaper one. It's not necessarily a bad purchase, but you are paying more to do the same job in the end.
- Scaling does require more processing power from your computer. This can mean worse performance for your system overall or needing to purchase a more powerful hardware.
Problematic- Scaling a small amount can lead to less clarity.
- When using multiple monitors, each with a different scaling percentage, things can get wonky when windows are dragged between displays.
P.S. I'm not arguing against getting more pixels, assuming it doesn't cause problems. But it's good to recognize where there are diminishing returns.Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!