High aspect ratio monitors have steadily been gaining all the more popularity, and for good reason. They are practically equivalent to a dual monitor setup, but without the border of the bezel coming between the displays, without having to worry about synchronizing the features between both monitors, without multiple stands and the extra cable management. It allows you to have an ultrawide view of gaming or content creation applications, allowing for both a more complete view of the in-game surroundings, and increased multitasking potential. Additionally, though it is said beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it’s easy to argue how these ultrawide monitors are so much more stylish than equivalent multi-monitor setups.
When it comes to these ultrawide curved monitors, there is one particular company that absolutely dominates their competition: Samsung. Not only do their 49-inch monitors have some of the best features, color ranges, and response times available, but with their proprietary enhancements to Vertical Alignment (VA) technologies, they have created what Samsung calls a Super Vertical Alignment (SVA) panel. This panel allows for wider viewing angles, up to 300% better contrast ratios, higher brightness levels, and up to 50% faster Grey-to-Grey (G2G) response times – due to their faster liquid crystal switching speeds. Also, because of their higher overall transmittance, SVA panels are more power efficient and are more durable than their conventional VA counterparts. So, when it comes to comparing two of the best ultrawide 49-inch monitors, it comes to no surprise that both will be Samsung models.
When it comes specifically to gaming monitors, two of Samsung’s most popular 49-inch ultrawide 5120 x 1440p options are the C49RG90 (CRG9) and the Odyssey G9. The latter model is more expensive than the former, ranging from a price increase of 50%, to 400%, depending on availability. But the question is: Does the Samsung Odyssey G9 warrant its price tag, or does the CRG9 display better price to performance value? Let’s compare the two and find out.
Samsung CRG9 vs Odyssey G9
|Samsung Odyssey G9||Samsung CRG9|
|Screen Size||49 inches - Ultrawide||49 inches - Ultrawide|
|Resolution||5120 x 1440p||5120 x 1440p|
|Refresh Rate||240 Hz||120 Hz|
|Bit Depth||10 bits||10 bits|
|Colors||1.07 million||1.07 million|
|Contrast||2300 : 1||3000 : 1|
|Brightness||400-1000 nits||600-1000 nits|
Refresh Rate – Odyssey G9
Though both the CRG9 and the Odyssey G9 have an identical resolution, the latter monitor has double its refresh rate, being able to reach up to 240 Hz versus the 120 Hz of the CRG9. However, this means that in order to fully utilize the capabilities of the Odyssey G9, you will need a top-of-the-line PC build that can process games at, not only the demanding 1440p resolution, but also at a high framerate. Currently, the most powerful GPU for 1440p gaming is the Radeon RX 6900 XT, which averages about 169 FPS – though these benchmarks run by TechSpot were carried out using a Ryzen 9 3950X processor, so a small boost can be expected when utilizing a Ryzen 9 5950X which has better inter-core latency and utilizes AMD’s Smart Access Memory, in turn removing and GPU memory bottlenecking. Even still, processing games at over 200 FPS on a 1440p resolution is something that will only be possible for a limited number of titles unless in game graphical settings are reduced. On the other hand, the CRG9’s 120 Hz refresh rate is a much more realistic metric for current generation PC hardware to be able to process. In fact, even the new generation gaming consoles can process certain titles at 1440p and 120 FPS despite costing just $499; so, in that regard, the Odyssey G9’s refresh rate may be a bit overkill for most.
Curvature – Odyssey G9
Another aspect about these monitors that must be mentioned, is their curvature. The CRG9 has the standard 1800R curvature, but the Odyssey G9 Goes a step beyond with a 1000R curvature. Samsung states the Odyssey G9’s curvature is similar to that of the human eye, and therefore it causes less eye strain, though, marketing aside, it really just depends on preference. Many find steeper curvature to be more immersive and less strenuous, while others prefer little to no curvature.
Appearance – Odyssey G9
Once again, judging the exterior design of two monitors will be subjective, but the Odyssey G9 with its glossy white finish, thin black anti-glare matte bezel and Infinity Core Lighting display seems to be no match for the CRG9’s simpler, all black matte finish. The Infinity Core Lighting display can also be color customized, which is always a plus.
Panel Bit Depth – Tie
Both monitor’s feature the same SVA panel type, with a bit depth of 10 bits. Neither of the monitors make use of Frame Rate Control (FRC): a function that simulates a higher bit depth by switching between color tones in a manner that creates the illusion of more, intermediate, color tones being generated. With their pure 10-bit panel bit depth, both monitors are able to natively process 30-bit colors.
Display – Tie
The pixel pitch on the display for the Odyssey G9 is slightly higher than the CRG9, as the former has a pitch of 0.234 mm, while the latter has a pitch of 0.233 mm.
Pixel densities are identical, but where the Odyssey G9 excels, is its display area. The area taken by the active part of the screen in relation to the total front area of the display, is 96.03% for the Odyssey G9, and 91.12 for the CRG9. Both monitors feature a W-LED backlight, and are capable of an impressive peak brightness level of 1,000 nits.
On the other hand, the CRG9 features an impressive static contrast of 3,000 to one, versus the 2,300 to one static contrast ratio of the Odyssey G9.
Both monitors utilize QLED displays and Quantum Dot technology.
Color Range – Tie
Each Samsung display covers 125% of the sRGB color space, and 95% of the DCI P3 color space. The CRG9 covers slightly more of the Adobe RGB color spectrum at 95%, versus the Odyssey G9’s 92%. Since both monitors are DisplayHDR 1000 compatible, the difference between the two is all but negligible.
Input Lag – Odyssey G9
For both multiplayer and single player titles, monitor response times are important in order to avoid frustration during gaming’s most clutch moments. Of course, a monitor’s response time is just a fraction of a system’s overall end-to-end latency, but if you can limit lag from as many sources as possible it can literally be game-changing. Now with Nvidia’s Reflex feature, and AMD’s Anti-Lag, bringing PC hardware’s contribution to overall input-latency to its minimum is more possible than ever. So, the lower the input lag metric you can find on a monitor, the better.
The Odyssey G9 definitely has the edge in this regard. It has a G2G and Motion Picture response time of only 1 millisecond, and an average response time of just 8 ms. At its native resolution, and non-native 60 Hz refresh rate, it reaches an input lag measurement of 22.5 ms; while at a variable refresh rate, it has an incredibly low input latency of just 2.2 ms (Rtings.com).
The CRG9, on the other hand, has a G2G of 4 ms and an MPRT of 4.9 ms. At its native resolution and non-native 60 Hz refresh rate it can reach up to 21.6 ms of input lag, and at a variable refresh rate, it displays a 14 ms input latency.
With a variable refresh rate difference of 11.8 ms, the Odyssey G9 becomes the superior monitor then it comes to input lag.
Ergonomics – Tie
Due to how large these monitors are, their ergonomic versatility will inevitably be limited. Both have a removeable stand, an adjustable height (up to 120 mm), and a left and right swivel (15 degrees). The forward and backward tilt ranges differ slightly, with the Odyssey G9 tilting forward by 3 degrees and backwards by 13 degrees, while the CRG9 can tilt forwards by 2 degrees and backwards by 15 degrees. If you are looking for extra ergonomic flexibility, both monitors have removable stands, and can be mounted onto a 100 x 100 mm VESA compatible stand.
Power Supply & Consumption – Tie
Since both monitors use similar Samsung panels and SVA technology, their power consumption is very similar. The Odyssey G9 does consumer slightly more power on average (108 Watts versus the CRG9’s 100 W) though this can be attributed to its higher refresh rate. The CRG9 also consumes less power while not operating, but the difference is marginal (0.3 W vs 0.5 W)
Connnectivity – CRG9
Most users will just require one HDMI or DP slot to plug their monitor into a computer, but having more connectivity options is always a plus. In this category, the CRG9 has a considerable advantage. The Odyssey G9 features two USB 3.0 Type-A downstream slots, one HDMI 2.0 port, and two DisplayPort 1.4 sockets. On the other hand, the CRG9 feature a USB 3.0 upstream port that can connect it to the PC, and four USB 3.0 downstream slots for plugging in peripherals. It also includes one HDMI 2.0, and two DisplayPort 1.4 slots. Both monitors have a single 3.5 mm audio-out jack as well.
Features – Odyssey G9
The CRG9 and the Odyssey G9 have several features in common, namely: Flicker-free technology, Picture-by-Picture & Picture-in-Picture, Quantum Dot Color, Eye Saver Mode/Low Blue Light, Eco Saving Plus, Refresh Rate Optimizer, and AMD FreeSync (Premium Pro for the Odyssey G9 and FreeSync 2 for the CRG9).
The features the CRG9 has that are missing from the Odyssey G9 are: Low Framerate Compensation (which removes minimum refresh rate boundary for FreeSync), Samsung MagicBright (which provides optimum view settings depending on the content you are watching) and Samsung MagicUpscale (which prevents image degradation when upscaling content).
The Odyssey G9 may lack those (admittedly trivial) features, but it makes up for it with several useful additions. Virtual Aim Point (which provides a crosshair overlay), Black Equalizer (a low-end gamma control which can improved shadow details), Mega Dynamic Contrast (which enhances dynamic contrast ratios in real time), Smart Eco Saving (local dimming technology for better energy efficiency without image quality loss), Super Arena Gaming UX (an overall UI that allows customization and access to functions which can be activated while gaming), Game Mode (optimizes the screen’s settings for gaming), Off Timer Plus (which automatically turns off the monitor after a certain period of time within one to 23 hours), Low Input Lag Mode (reduces variable refresh rate input lag), and, finally, compatibility with Nvidia’s adaptive sync technology called G-Sync.
Currently, on Samsung’s official website, the GRG9 is priced at $1,099, while the Odyssey G19 is priced at $1,429.99: a cost difference of $330, which is not as pronounced as the current $2,600 price differential found on Amazon, which has limited availability for the Odyssey G9.
The displays are very similar in many aspects. The CRG9 has a better static contrast ratio (3000:1 vs 2300:1) and an ever so slight edge in regards to color reproduction (Adobe RGB 95% vs Adobe RGB 92%). It does, however, lack in refresh rate (120 Hz vs 240 Hz), screen curvature (1800R vs 1000R), and display area (91.12% vs 96.03%). It also falls short in regards to latency – both in G2G and MPRT response times (4 ms vs 1 ms) as well as monitor input lag (VRR 14 ms vs VRR 2.2 ms). So, discrepancies between the two displays exist, but are quite minimal. The curvature depends purely on preference, and the enhanced refresh rate of the Odyssey G9 is only useful if it’s connected to a high-end gaming PC that can handle this hardware-demanding task. Also, the features and connectivity are great to have, but, most of the time, won’t make or break a monitor purchase.
Competitive Gaming – Odyssey G9
Taking all the above into account, for competitive gamers that can make use of an ultrawide monitor for 32:9 compatible gaming titles, the Odyssey’s excellent input lag – paired with the added advantage of Nvidia Reflex / AMD Anti-Lag – and enhanced refresh rates are definitely worth its extra cost. All the added gaming features, the customizable lighting display and the increased curvature are just additional perks that further increase its value, and make the deal even sweeter.
General Use & AAA Gaming – CRG9
For single player triple-A-title gaming, the extra 330 USD cost of the Odyssey G9 is a bit too much. The discrepancy in input lag, though considerable for competitive gaming (which requires optimal precision) is not going to make much of a difference for most single-player titles. The only thing that can increase the worth of the Odyssey G9, in regards to single-player gaming, is the monitor’s curvature. If you actually do feel less eye strain when viewing higher-curvature monitors, then it may be worth the extra money, but in terms of the display itself, there’s not much that justifies a near 30% price increase.