Lenovo Legion R45w-30 44.5" VA 170Hz Dual QHD Curved Gaming Monitor 67B1GAC3AU $998 Delivered @ Amazon AU

80

Affiliate

Go to Deal

Cashback

BargainHunterWA on 28/05/2025 - 11:28 amazon.com.au (402 clicks)
Last edited 28/05/2025 - 11:41 by 2 other users

This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Seen these been popping up at Amazon and HN and they are looking pretty good. Anyone used one?

About this item
Explore all the corners of the battlefield on the impressively large DQHD 44.5-inch monitor, with the 32:9, ultra-wide, 1500R curved display.
Play all your favorite games at a buttery-smooth 170Hz refresh rate
Super responsive and sharp gameplay on 1ms MPRT¹ response time and ClearMR 7000 certified monitor ensures that you’re always winning.
Relish one-cable docking and simultaneous 75 Watts charging with our fullfunction USB-C³ port.
Enjoy completely stutter-free gameplay, powered by AMD FreeSync Premium Pro² and Adaptive Sync technologies.

Price History at CamelCamelCamel.

Related Stores

Amazon AU

Marketplace

• 

  scrimshaw on 28/05/2025 - 11:32

  +14

  It's cheaper on eBay. It's also a "fairly old" model, with the ATL price at below $800
  https://www.ozbargain.com.au/product/lenovo-legion-r45w-30

  Being a VA monitor, it's not exactly a high tier pick for gaming due to dark level smearing, if you're okay with 34" ultrawide at UWQHD 1440p there are OLED monitors in the $1000+ range (refurbished Dell outlet) or $1200~$1399 range, see AW3425DW 34" OLED or 49" Samsung OLED

• 

  witheredcouch on 28/05/2025 - 11:40

  https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/17wj6i…

  Looks like it was this price 2 years ago.

  A 44.5" 32:9 is essentially 2x 24" monitors side by side. I personally would want more vertical real-estate than that.
  https://www.displaywars.com/44,5-inch-32x9-vs-24-inch-16x9

  I think a 34" 21x9 monitor might offer more practical real-estate, or if you must go Super Ultrawide a 49" which is equivalent to 2 x 27" monitors.

  https://www.displaywars.com/44,5-inch-32x9-vs-34-inch-21x9

  • 

    caprimulgus on 28/05/2025 - 11:57

    -5

    I personally would want more vertical real-estate than that.

    "Real estate" usually refers to pixels rather than physical screen size. A 44.5" and 49" super ultrawide at the same resolution has the exact same real estate - the 49" has a larger physical height/width.

    I think a 34" 21x9 monitor might offer more practical real-estate, or if you must go Super Ultrawide a 49" which is equivalent to 2 x 27" monitors.

    I think you are confusing real-estate with ppi. I personally would prefer the ppi on a 44.5" 5120x1440 ultrawide (approx 120ppi), over a 34" 3440x1440 or 49" 5120x1440 (110ppi). Much like I would prefer a 24" 1440 over a 27" 1440, because I would prefer the higher ppi (and same desktop real estate) vs the increased physical height/width.

    Personally, I prefer 40" 5K2K (approx 140ppi). :)

    • 

      witheredcouch on 28/05/2025 - 12:04

      +3

      I see real-estate as the combination of resolution and size and their relationship when it comes to real world usability. It also depends how someone would scale the panel. It depends whether you are talking about physical real estate (size) or usable real-estate (resolution), both of which are often used when discussing monitors.

      A lot of people would run a 1440p 24" panel at over 100% scaling, which negates some of the benefits of the real-estate offered by that added resolution. I would likely run it at 100% scaling and enjoy the solid ppi but find it lacking in vertical space. When dealing with the reasonable real-estate offered by a 1440p or higher resolution would go for more physical usable space (the added height), over the resolution advantage of a smaller, wider panel.

      I was more explaining the size because a lot of people seem to see the number of inches on 32x9 or 21x9 monitors and not realise that they aren't actually as big as they sound.

      • 

        caprimulgus on 28/05/2025 - 12:11

        -5

        I see real-estate as the combination of resolution and size and their relationship when it comes to real world usability.

        The combination of resolution and physical size is ppi. :)

        As I said, desktop real-estate is commonly used for the amount of pixels (irrespective of size/ppi). The USABILITY of those pixels is a separate matter - eg. a 1 x 100,000,000,000,000 screen would have an extremely high desktop real estate, but would be completely unusable. :)

        What you are talking about is the usability (shape and ppi) of that real-estate. :)

        It also depends how someone would scale the panel.

        Yes, absolutely. Hence why actual resolution and "effective" desktop real estate can be different. (FWIW, I use 40" 5K2K / 32" 4K without scaling, which are approx 140ppi).

        I'm not saying you are wrong to point out the nuances in different ultrawides - you are just using the wrong terms. What you want is more physical height / a "more usable" to you ppi (rather than more desktop real-estate). :)

        If I had to sum it up, I would say: you prefer a more usable/readable (to you) ppi of around 110ppi (equivalent of 27" 1440) and physical height of a 27" monitor. This monitor has a higher ppi (harder to read for some - and may require the use of scaling depending on the person), and lower physical height. That's how I would describe it. :)

  • 

    parker2004au on 28/05/2025 - 13:41

    +2

    Agree with the vertical real estate,

    I didn't realise this when I bought this monitor.

    I was using a 32" 4K monitor but having two things side by side would often get squashy - then I got this 44.5" QHD which is great for stuff side by side but then I lost a lot vertfically so a lot more scrolling. Productivity wise I found I do more scrolling up down then side to side lol.

• 

  bruc3 on 28/05/2025 - 12:04

  Hmmm $1k for VA uw monitor, doesnt seem like a good deal.
  Much rather go for Oled around this price range.

  • 

    Dienk on 28/05/2025 - 12:06

    You should have gone to Specsavers

    Edit: you fixed it fast enough 😂

  • 

    justchase on 28/05/2025 - 23:11

    Have fun with the burn in if you're using it for anything except gaming

    • 

      SpeedAU on 25/06/2025 - 12:41

      this is the real problem for productivity so its either IPS or VA, the lenovo at least knows that why an aggressive curl and cutting of 5inches to increase pixel density effectively eliminates pixel problems at standard viewing distances and wash out you do not notice due to the angle.

      • 

        justchase on 25/06/2025 - 16:46

        I'm just sick of endless "should get oled" comments from people who are just repeating what they saw on YouTube

        • 

          SpeedAU on 25/06/2025 - 19:36

          @justchase: agreed.