44 minutes ago, Bob Scott said:

I have both flat and curved screens, and TBH, I can't find it within myself to form a preference one way or the other for flight sim use. 

Other factors matter more to me--pixel size/density, brightness, contrast, glare reduction, native refresh rate, G-Sync etc.

I am sure I prefer the curved even for a TV, but only AFTER using a curved monitor, a mild curve is preferential. The manufacturers make too many with a huge curve and jam it down your throat without enough choices.

I think most people would prefer the 2500r curvature even for web browsing, and 1800r is also fine, 1500r or lower is putrid insanity for web browsing.
Tried for 3 weeks and my eyes were always telling my brain "that's too curved, you'll never get used to it".

Once you go curved, the flat 43" TV's will all look bent outward to you, it's been over a week since I went back to flat, and my 43" TCL still looks like a 1980's CRT that is bent outward. So if you never buy a curved or never look at one, it will be easier to take the flat screen.
 

Edited August 15, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

2 hours ago, Fielder said:

Odessey G7 is the LC32G75TQSNXZA.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/best/by-usage/gaming

https://www.rtings.com/monitor

That monitor is only rated high because of competitive gamers, and makes very little sense otherwise for games like MSFS.
That monitor is the end-all be-all for FPS shooters that want a VA monitor at 1440p, but it's way too curved for my liking (1000r on 16:9, no way brother).

The Dell I mentioned above for under $400 uses a Samsung panel, is only 1800r, and is 4k. If I was going to look at the G7, I'd much rather pick the Gigabyte M32UC, as it's a better monitor IMO, especially given it has a 1500r curvature instead, 4k, and is still 165hz capable. 240 hz is a gimmick, and what matters more is the motion smoothing function to maximize motion resolution in combination with the native res. The Gigabyte is the best under $900 in both respects, and is higher res to improve text sharpness.

If it comes down to it, more HZ vs. more resolution, take the extra resolution every time.
Even 120hz did nothing for me to be honest, that is why I settled for the TCL 43" TV.

Do I wish the TCL was curved, yah of course, but show me an 1800r - 3000r television that is 43" and 16:9 and I will buy someone a beer.

 

Edited August 16, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

higher resolution equals lower fps.

45 minutes ago, Fielder said:

higher resolution equals lower fps.

True...

I play in 1440p sometimes, but 1440p looks better on a 4k monitor than on a 1440p monitor.
The 6900xt has so much horsepower in non-VR mode, that it doesn't matter much, 4k or 1440p, unless you are chasing FPS.
 

Edited August 16, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

You can now have both in one monitor.

(1) Corsair shows bendable 45" OLED Gaming Monitor with 240 Hz - Gamescom 2022 - YouTube

I ended up keeping the TCL 43s435 with it's 6000:1 contrast VA panel, and I pretty much got used to using a flat screen again, though not 100% as good as a slight curve. That said, overall the TCL 4k TV's are better than almost all monitors under $800, as long as you can live with 60hz.

The TCL TV is really a step above, plus you get a remote and a 43" - 4k "monitor" for under $300 🙂

Edited August 28, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery