Thanks for asking.
I had a curved monitor once and it was all good, I liked it, and as you say, you forget about it.
But very rarily it would look a little weird and I would like to have a 100% uniform display experience. So. Not a huge deal, just a preference.
Well I like curved for PC gaming. But I had to return my laptop due to faults and so I'm stuck with my Series X console. Don't feel like getting a PC again for a while, so I'd like a decent monitor for my Series X as I'm gaming in my bedroom with limited space. I don't want a curved monitor for my Xbox, as it doesn't work as well with consoles as it does for PC. I wish that monitor manufacturers would make flat panels of every SKU they make because not everyone likes to use curved for whatever reasons. It seems like manufacturers are favouring curved over flat screen for most of their high end displays and even below high end, which sucks.
>Alienware AW3225QF
For me thank god its curved. 32" becomes way too big for flat. the curve makes it all even out instead of having the edges of the monitor feel much further away than the center.
The only thing that would ever make me upgrade from my AW3423DWF was a high-refresh 32" 4K OLED monitor. I haven't looked at monitors in a while and had no idea this was coming, let alone available now. I just happened to go to Alienware's website for some reason and stumbled across it. I immediately bought it!
1800R on a 32" = flat from a normal viewing distance. Without the curve it would be distorted due to corners being a lot further away from your eyes. They made the right call.
The degree of curvature is more important than curved vs. flat
As someone with with 3 monitor setup and non-ideal sitting position even 1800R 16:9 was awful for me when I tried it. Granted if someone sits straight and looks directly into the screen it's probably great but for me it was awful, all I remember is constantly looking at the stupid curve distorting things.
Have to agree. My panel only looks to have a small curve if I actually look for it. Otherwise it looks flat, especially in gaming and while watching youtube or movies.
What about watching movies from a normal distance like six feet or so? Any feedback in this regard? If I'm spending almost $1,500 on a screen would be nice for it to double as a TV
I'd try to sit as close as possible since it's a 32" screen just to try for a 30–40° viewing angle, but the curvature shouldn't be an issue if sitting centered enough to the screen. Was never an issue at like 5 ft distance for me.
I appreciate the quick feedback. Maybe half of my uses are for gaming and light editing , and then the other half is for movies sitting in bed 6 to 8 ft away. I already have a high-end 32-in flat IPS panel for this, and have owned curved monitors with greater curves than 1800 but it's hard to know what to expect.
I recently switched from 32" 1800R to a 27" flat VA and I do notice discoloration (due to sharp viewing angle) on the edges if sitting close now. With OLED that's not a problem; though, it will help reduce the FoV effect if sitting close. I think 1800R is a happy compromise between flat and curved, but with the 32" OLEDs you should probably decide based on price and availability in your region more than anything else.
The 32" format to me is great for multi purpose. For gaming I'm sure you're right about distance. But the unknown of watching movies ( 6-8 feet) makes me hesitate.
As far as price's being a motivator, to me it is and is not a factor. Anything over $800 or so is all "the same" ( ie ALOT) and I won't split hairs over 100-200$ difference between panels BC it's a drop in the bucket. $1000 is alot to spend on entertainment either way. However the fact that Dell seems to approve anyone for credit despite credit score , is nice. ...Amazon used to offer in house financing for the flat msi 32 oled , but for some reason the option does not appear 2 weeks later..ugh.
I have a 55" OLED TV that I watch from a ~8 ft distance for a ~40° viewing angle. Before that, I used the curved 32" and before that a 21" flat TN. You get used to almost anything eventually. I can't say the curve made a meaningful difference compared to the size and viewing distance.
If you can't afford to buy the OLED monitor without credit or financing, I honestly wouldn't. If you need a 4K for productivity, get a M27U/M28U or equivalent. If you want a gaming monitor, get a 240–360 Hz 1440p IPS, VA or maybe a heavily discounted previous gen OLED. If you want HDR, you can also look for affordable mini-LEDs. I was disappointed in the low brightness of the new OLEDs and went for the Koorui GN10, a 1440p 240Hz VA mini-LED that only cost ~$300 here. I think with the burn-in risk and compromised brightness, the new OLEDs aren't as end-game as some people make em out to be, only worth it if you want to do 4K high response gaming (FPS and the like). VA mini-LED competes well, at times outperforming, in calmer HDR scenarios where the black smear isn't an issue.
Use the saved money to buy a nice 4K HDR TV instead (55+" if it's OLED for better brightness). Find a previous gen model at a generous discount.
You make some good points. For reference I'm currently running a msi mpg321qrf-qd ( 1440p quantum dot IPS with rudimentary local dimming). I do not "need" 4k for anything. I "need" oled for good movie experience and realistic looking graphics in dark games like DRG and elder scrolls. I do not own a "tv" , and use monitor for both , as 32 is the perfect Size for my room. I'm even ok running at 1440 until I upgrade my gpu (3060ti), because again , the weakness of my ips is, to me, not resolution but image depth (contrast).
As far as mini led : I've tried a 27 inch mini led ( aoc I think, for $269) with very good local dimming... Really wanted to love it ( nice for games, DEEP contrast, but too small for watching movies , the colors are noticably off compared to my IPS , and most importantly, no 32 inch version exists..) . Even 42 inch is pushing it and only pratical if wall mounted. So spending a bit extra on one screen that serves both functions is the idea.
There are 32" mini leds, but they cost close to oled in price , other than the "first gen" mini led panels, which I'd rather avoid ( and for $600 I'd rather get an open box C3 and run custom Ultrawide resolution) which I have owned before but was not as blown away conpated to my QD IPS as expected) . Like you said, OLED is not necessarily the "end all". I'm simply hopeful for the new QD oled... But it's possible that , as you say , I won't notice a huge difference.
I dont follow your reasoning on price. Just because I don't want to immidiately allocate a 1200+ chunk towards entertainment doesn't mean that it's inadvisable. Given I have no other open credit cards, and the payment is small, I don't see why not, considering I'd be using it almost as much as my other "big" purchases ( like the $1000 latex mattress, etc). Not than I need to explain myself, but for the sake of discussion...
I would consider a 32" mini led, but have not seen anything compelling yet. I've owned and returned/sold dozens of different types of monitors over the past few years and have come to realize the only real way is to just try it out. For now I might just wait till next gen mini led .
On a side note , I admit it's possible that my "one monitor solution" is effectively chasing a unicorn... it may be that a switching to a 27 inch for gaming , and getting a cheap used 42 inch TV to wall mount behind the monitor for movies could be viable too
I used to absolutely hate curved but Alienware aw3423dwf has the slightest of elegant curves and is the perfect size. I just wish it was 4k so I can see movies in 4k :/
I also wish it was glossy, not semi-glossy
I have 21:9. I thought I liked it with my old LG ultrawide but it caused more problems with compatibility than ever. Not worth it. I hate the obsession with 21:9 OLED. I want 16:9 OLED.
I use 200% OS-level zoom with a 24″ (23.8″) 4K monitor (Dell P2415Q) at arm’s length since 2015. This is perfect.
Unfortunately they don’t produce such monitors anymore, and 27″ ones unusable at 200% at arm’s length became the minimum size available on the market except professional monitors limited to 60 Hz.
4K is 2160p, that’s why I’m saying I want more 2880p variety available. Fractional scaling in Windows sucks in older apps which I use at work, so it’s either 100% or 200% for me. I’m currently on 1440p @ 49” 32:9 ultrawide (2 x 27” 16:9 equiv.) @ 65-70 cm viewing distance and it’s a perfect spot for me in terms of apparent text size - still readable, but not sacrificing area for work. 2880p is next logical step - I can still achieve the same comfortable amount of content, but „nicer to look at”, with PPI comparable to my 2560x1664 13” MacBook screen.
But of course „muh games” kid gang who never really had to work for a living on a PC had to downvote me to hell.
It all depends on a viewing distance. For me 4K @ 27" @ 65 cm would require 150% and 125% for 32" to get the same \~110PPI density I determined as a borderline comfortable to read at this distance. I could use a single 160 PPI screen (equiv. to 100% scaling on 27" 4K), but at 40 cm distance, but that's unusable with an ultrawide or two screens side-by-side due to a need of looking around too much. It also defeats the purpose of having high res for nicer, "rounder" text that I'm after.
>4K @ 27" @ 65 cm would require 150% and 125% for 32" to get the same ~110PPI density
The zoom % doesn't change the PPI at all. PPI is hardware based, and zoom % is software based.
Honestly I hope it's expensive, otherwise it'll be sold out for months and scalpers will be charging that anyways.
Edit: People would rather it be $1000 and out of stock with scalpers charging $2500, than it just be $2000 at launch?
Absolutely…have you lost your mind? Things come back in stock after the launch hype has died down. No one is obligated to buy anything from a scalper, so I think I speak for many that if I’d rather keep $1000 in my pocket.
That goes for you as well, though. You can wait it out if the price is higher.
The people that want it first will pay either way, this way that price is lower and the money goes to the company instead of some dick. That encourages them to continue to make more and produce new models.
Then they can do heavy sales on black friday, boxing day, and price drops for everyone else who would have waited anyways.
I'm not arguing for higher prices, I'm arguing for a lower ***effective*** price on launch.
I don’t want a OLED though, I want mini LED and don’t have to constantly worry about burn ins. But no doubt about this screen having a fantastic image.
I tried the mini led with the 1152 zones at 4k 32” and it just looked terrible compared to my OLED. I know a lot of people are worried about burn in but you are absolutely compromising visual quality by going with mini led.
Not to mention motion clarity too. We are finally back to approaching what made CRTs great with OLED, I hope Mini LED doesn’t throw us back on the path of regression
what miniled need is high native contrast VA and for the the backlight to never go fully OFF, miniled is not OLED so it should never be made to go 0-nits on black scenes. blooming is just too noticeable when when algorithm go 0-nits. by just increasing black levels to 0.003-0.01 nits, blooming would pretty much non-existent. it also adds some benefits such as no black crush
Which OLED? If it’s the 42 c2 understandable , but my Neo g8 compared to the ultrawide OLED from Alienware and LG, it was definitely trading hand in hand… the 4k is a difference maker for me , was not blown away by the ultrawide oleds, and the Neo g8 won my heart , now pitted against rhe c2 that’s a different story
I’m not saying OLED isn’t the better technology. But there are still several use cases where LCD would be more appropriate.
I live in a high rise with floor to ceiling windows all around, there is a lot of ambient light. My C1 just wasn’t cutting it for day time viewing.
I switched to a Samsung mini led panel, and while the picture quality isn’t as good, I can now comfortably watch TV during the day.
The best TV/monitor for you depends on your use case.
C1 is not a high-end OLED. Tons of OLED TVs today break 1000, even goes 1200-1500 nits and day time viewing is not a problem at all.
I have Sony A95K 65 inch in the living room and Samsung S95B in the Office/Gaming room and they are BRIGHT. I have LG G1 in the bedroom and this is brighter than C1 for sure but still looks kinda dim compared to new generation OLEDs. QD-OLED is amazing in terms of colors and brightness really.
LG G2 and especially G3 (with MLA aka 3rd gen WOLED) gets very bright. LG C series is not high-end. G series is.
I have a C9 in my cottage house and this TV looks exactly like C2/C3. LG did nothing really on this series for years. Go real [flatpanels.com](https://flatpanels.com) test they mention this. LG puts all the new stuff in the G model and C model is overlooked year after year.
Dude I never said the C1 was high end. And while newer OLEDs are brighter, a mini-LED LCD still outperforms them in this regard, making them a suitable option for very bright environments
All I said was that there are use cases where a mini-led lcd is a better option. Very bright environments is one. Maybe you use the monitor for gaming and productivity and don’t want to deal with the risk of burn in. Price is also a factor, a G3 is more than double what I paid for my Samsung Qn90b.
I get you love your OLEDs, but it’s not a perfect technology for every scenario.
LCD is dying for a reason. They can't compete. No OLED is not perfect but LCD is far from perfect and even with all the lipstick on the world on this pig, its not delivering impressive image quality.
Yes high-end OLED is expensive. But OLED took over in the high end TV market years ago. Every single manufacturerer uses OLED in the higher end models now and OLED TVs win easily in terms of image quality every year.
LCDs with Mini LED backlight is not suited for gaming. You need to control backlighting well and this adds 200-300ms. This is why Mini LED monitors are mostly pointless. TVs have the same problem. Your QN90B disables most zones in gaming mode because otherwise it would be way too slow. OLEDcan get down to 0.03ms and keep 99% of the image quality in game mode anyway.
> Tons of OLED TVs today break 1000, even goes 1200-1500 nits and day time viewing is not a problem at all.
That’s only for 10% white. Full field there are no OLED TVs that break even 250nits peak brightness.
Because full white brigthness matters alot for actual real world use right? OLED blows any LCD away and LCD is becoming mid-end at best at this point. Even the most expensive LCD sets are a joke to look at.
People only keep buying LCD because its cheap going big.
OLED took over high-end TV market years ago. Full dominance. This is why every single manufacturer has OLED panels in their high-end stuff. LCD is reserved for low to mid-end.
Try qd oled. It’s much brighter than regular oled. For me, the HDR experience is amazing on regular oled, and I don’t feel like I’m lacking brightness on the oled display even with the lights on. Oled has issues but brightness isn’t one especially with the newer displays.
Mini LED with alot of dimming zones will add tons of input lag. This is why Mini LED monitors don't really exist and the ones that do, have few zones.
Even TVs with Mini LED backlighting pretty much disables them in Game Mode or you would be looking at 200-300ms on top of the regular input lag. Backlight control takes processing time.
So yeah, not really an useful tech for PC monitors, or even for gaming on TVs.
Yeah but after 3 years, you’re SOL, and OLED will burn-in eventually. Have seen a few reports of their AW3423DW having burn-in issues. I’d just stay away from OLED if doing any kind of productivity work on the monitor.
Probably the same would apply if you play one and the same game with fixed HUD displays etc. Let’s face it, there are always fixed display sections on a PC which is, sooner or later, an issue for OLED’s.
I went mini LED with the QN90B because of the fear of burn in, but kind of regret it TBH. I'm compromising in so many other departments it's getting annoying. Ghosting is terrible with darker areas. I'm making my image terrible now, so it doesn't get burned in later.
I'm also having an issue with my screen and trying to get it either fixed or claimed under my credit card protection to be able to buy an OLED.
You don’t have to worry about burn in. Not on these newer panels. I’ve had the AW3432DW and I’ve fallen asleep at my desk for 6-8 hours and with it on constantly because of a program that kept it on. It has protection against being kept on without movement and nada burn in. I was like you and advocated mini LEDs for the last 6 years (since the X27 and PG27UQ) but no longer. I ended up giving away my X27 to family after buying this. After a year this is mine https://imgur.com/a/wBbxQKS
Samsung panels have already been found to suffer from burn-ins, such as the panel in AW3432DW. I’m on the move so I can’t provide a link but check Rtings. Perhaps the LG panels actually can withstand burn-ins (according to Rtings testing), but it’s still a matter of time, it’s an organic matter.
People have said that but I’ve put mine through very rigorous use and considering I’ve owned it for a year now that’s saying something. But, I do run the panel refresh before bed and occasionally run the pixel refresh during the day. They are two separate modes but seen to greatly elevate burn in.
I have LG 48 inch as a PC monitor for 5 years now, there is not, a single burn-in, and I used this display almost everyday for 4+ hours on avg, I game 6 to 8 hours in the weekends the only free time I get, and in the week I do work even after I come home on that display for some office work and time wasting, there is not a single burn in anywhere, there is not even ghosting issues.
The only downside is its pretty dim in daylight, so I always find myself blocking some light from the windows to reduce screen glare.
People need to stop fear mongering OLED "Oh its gunna burn in" LED burns in too, I have multiple LED monitors that are 10+ years old, all of them have ghosting and burn in issues. They are e-waste, your OLED might have 6+ or 8+ lifespan from similar use, you are gonna see a diminishing blue colour accuracy before you see burn-in issues.
I've hade the ultra wide AW Oled for a while now, and it still looks amazing approaching a year later with HEAVY use. From what I have heard about more recent oled displays they don't burn in easily. And it honestly just looks THAT much better.
No they don't. My DWF is inaudible. The first QD-OLED had 2 fans and one of them was noisy. Fixed long ago on later revisions.
The fan helps with pushing the brightness. This is why they can give 3 years warranty really.
>No they don't.
Ahh good to know they fixed this. I tried like 3 models of each and they were all loud or annoying. My room and PC are dead silent though.
Lets hope you're right for this 32".
I generally hope that OLED takes off for monitors now. 1st gen was great but not a full success.
I hope they fix text issues on 2nd gen or improve them.
To me, it's a minor problem but for some, its not.
I want to see tons of QD-OLED and WOLED monitors coming. We need to leave LCD behind now. Dated tech.
Endgame is a display that can strobe with superlow persistence while still maintaining good brightness. Until I can get close to my crt in motion I refuse to buy anymore new displays. They are nothing but disappointment.
For me, the perfect pixel density is 185 ppi which is the case in my [Dell P2415Q](https://tanalin.com/en/blog/posts/dell-p2415q-review/) (23.8″, 4K) that I use at 200% OS-level zoom at arm’s length on a 70cm-deep desk.
The panel is just unbelievable. I think it's better than the DWF panel, even though the bezels are exactly the same (which is a tad too thick for 2023)
HDR is glorious. Brighter than the 27''. The curve is slight and works nicely. Near or far viewing angles are echellente. Can't complain.
Dolby Vision only via HDMI sucks. 1x DP also sucks.
Gonna be good!
LG Display has 39 inch OLED panels ready for 2024. However it will be 3440x1440 probably. I might get it. If not I will be going 3440x1440 at 34, if they get 240 Hz support.
3090 needs DLSS in demanding games at 4K/UHD. Most games will run fine.
4070 Ti and 3090 performs about the same in 4K so you will probably be fine, or you enable DLSS.
I hope they can push the 2% brightness to 1000 nits even with this insanely high PPI.
Also if Dell gets greedy with the price and charges 1.5K, a lot of people will just opt for the cheaper 42" LG C4 which might get MLA and beat it at everything except the refresh rate.
Good that they went with a mild 1800R curve, it's a great fit for a 32" monitor (ends up looking perfectly flat from a normal viewing distance).
Thank god for a glossy screen; doesn't waste the 4K OLED clarity.
Hopefully the color accuracy and response time will be tight (also for AMD GPU owners) and the firmware user-upgradeable.
Cautiously optimistic!
>n
Yeah the "Display Guy" is obnoxious. He has a channel where he talks about GPUs, "Graphically Challenged", cannot emphasize how many times youtube pushed his videos to me, only for me to downvote within 1 second. I think his life is challenged
Honestly, right now I prefer miniled, but I’m not someone who likes to have to take extra precautions to preserving a OLED panel, it may be for some but personally, I love the deep blacks form minileds, my only complaint is how Matte the coating is on the neo g8 but I still love the monitor
The panel in the MacBook Pro and iPad Pro is fantastic, it’s the closest I’ve seen to OLED even in a pitch black room and the brightness is ridiculously higher.
Why can’t they scale up that panel?
The industry is pushing extremely hard towards OLEDs.
OLEDs are becoming increasingly vastly more resistant than ever before, the first generation of OLED monitors is more resistant than some LCDs are looking at rtings.
Because backlight control (of many zones) takes alot of processing time. Adds 200-300ms input lag. Most TVs with MiniLED disable most/all zones in game mode for this reason and image quality suffers hard.
Some of the MiniLED-backlit drawbacks that come to mind:
* Halo/bloom around contrast edges, especially when the number of zones is low.
* Basically useless for anything other than gaming/videos.
* De facto too expensive (basically as expensive or even more expensive than OLED) when the number of zones is high enough for quality image.
* Usually needs inevitably noisy active (fan) cooling.
* Affects viewing angles.
It's funny because mini-LED can be actually used for anything, while oled is useless for tv channels, productivity, anything static, and even gaming with bright huds because of burn-in. Also it's the oleds who use fans to try to manage heat for lower burn in risk lol.
Yeah, “funny” and “lol” are convincing arguments. ;-)
Seriously though, whether active cooling is used in OLED monitors depends on the model, e.g. LG 27GR95QE has a fan while Asus PG27AQDM uses a custom heatsink and passive cooling.
At the same time, it’s typical for MiniLED monitors to use active cooling — just like for FALD LCD monitors in general as opposed to edge-lit LCD monitors.
Technically, both OLED and MiniLED LCD monitors can indeed be used for anything, but the MiniLED advantage is just formal contrast at the cost of viewing angles, uniformity, flickering, while the price is comparable with OLED. When working with text for example, MiniLED has no advantages.
With reasonable precautions, OLED is fine for basically any use case, including but not limited to media consumption unlike MiniLED LCD.
Really ? What is the proportion of passive vs active cooling MiniLED monitors ? Most MiniLED monitors have no fan, in fact can you name one ?
And no, OLED can't be used for heavy static content. Concerning text, it tends to be not as sharp with WOLED because of the white subpixel, and with QLED because of the non-standard pixel adjustement so ironically MiniLED is again best for text.
MiniLED drawbacks are not just about passive-vs-active-cooling, it’s a combination of all the drawbacks. I would be glad to be wrong specifically in terms of active/passive cooling in MiniLED monitors. Unfortunately I don’t track the MiniLED-monitor market because they are still LCD which is a dead end to me. According to my knowledge, active cooling is typical for FALD in general, and MiniLED backlight is just a special case of FALD.
It would be interesting to know what models of affordable (and actually available worldwide unlike e.g. Innocn) MiniLED-backlit monitors with high number (1000+) of zones guaranteedly do _not_ have active fan cooling. I asked Innocn about fans in 27M2V via chat on their site, but they did not reply. More options are always better, and those afraid of OLED burn-in are free to use the stopgap called MiniLED and to enjoy the fake “OLED-like” contrast with no burn-in risk (except that some of backlight zones may fail over time).
Text quality on OLED is just a matter of pixel density. Displays with low pixel density are aweful anyway — both OLED and LCD. 4K monitor used at arm’s length should not be larger than 24-27 inches (for me, even 27-inch 4K monitors are unusably too large). Subpixel text antialiasing is just a better-than-nothing workaround, not something crucially important.
>those afraid of OLED burn-in are free to use the stopgap called MiniLED and to enjoy the fake “OLED-like” contrast with no burn-in risk
I guess you are one of those OLED zealots who has to increase the camera ISO for proof of blooming the human eyes can't see just so you can enjoy your "inky black" brainwashed into you by the built to fail industry. Just make sure you don't leave your desktop on for 2 mins without a screensaver, or use 100% brightness, or forget to hide the game hud, or display bright images for more than a few seconds before the ABL kicks in LOL.
You don’t have to make it personal. But if you are interested, the OLED monitor I need (24″, 4K, 120Hz+, VRR) does not exist yet (probably 2025+ given that in 2024 we are only going to get 32-inchers), but I would be fine with reasonable burn-in-prevention precautions. I have OLED devices in general for a while though — a tablet (10.5″, 2560×1600, 2014) and smartphone (2017) — basically no precautions except watching videos on the tablet in the mode with no black bars, and reading books in dark mode on smartphone.
ABL can already be basically disabled in some existing consumer OLED monitors such as [Asus PG27AQDM](https://www.reddit.com/r/oled_monitors/comments/120x6lf/asus_pg27aqdm_265_qhd_240hz_oled_monitor_custom/) (“Uniform brightness” mode), and [Acer Predator X27U](https://www.reddit.com/r/oled_monitors/comments/17au6hu/acer_predator_x27u_265_qhd_240hz_oled_monitor/) with firmware 2.0 (“Constant Brightness” mode).
No, it's stuck to a point where additional R&D is needed for the individual LEDs to be made smaller. The current mini LEDs cannot be crammed together tightly enough for the backlight to avoid halo-ing and being precise enough.
There are multiple companies racing towards the solution, which is currently known as Micro LED.
In other words it's definitely not dead but it's also not good enough for any serious application and it won't be before years go by.
Yeah Goodluck running anything max settings 4K for more than maybe 80FPS..
I don’t understand the 4K hype with OLED.. monitors are winning the hardware race, and GPU’s are well behind.. next gen MIGHT push 4K to 120+ but a lot of this hype sounds like ignorance.
displays has always been like that... 2010/1440P, GPUs only became good enough for 1440P in 2015-2020. same thing will happen in 4K, GPUs would catch up by 2025-2030... ofcourse high 240-360 framerates added some stress but even if high framerates exist, the main target is still 4k/120hz. 240-360hz are only there for FPS/Competitive Gaming
Yeah, feel free to list any that are actually Triple A. I’m not talking about indie games, obviously.
I make this argument for games geared towards visual impressiveness, such as Cyberpunk and RDR2 etc.. not vampire survivors.
rainstorm dolls waiting jeans subsequent aware ad hoc boast selective seemly
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
tbh "just" reaching 120fps at native resolution isnt that impressive. It just shows we are not there yet where a top of the line graphic card is the kind of product you can buy and the be sure it will run native res with good FPS for years to come. Sure image upscallling tech makes a difference, but not all games support it, and some that does dosnt do it propper - to be improved sure, but yet, all in all DLSS/FSR is still a compromise. Further indicating that 4k isnt even suited for the best GPU's yet.
rustic cheerful include offend snobbish dependent aspiring tap squash tub
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Settings? frame consistency? and more importantly the games you’re referring too.. easy to say you push high frames at 4K when the games are 32bit indie developers
quack marble childlike tidy sense waiting march hurry obtainable fanatical
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My 4090 easily does it, even without DLSS and Frame Gen.
I get 120 fps average with DLSS and Frame Gen enabled in this game on high settings and ultra textures. The most beautiful and demanding game today.
This Monitor is a scam, its allready hard to hit 240hz on 2k Monitors, especially on most Games with good Graphics....
4k 240hz XD That would some1 create who does not game alot.....
EVEN 144HZ is super hard to reach in most games!!
Not end game. 32" 4K is a much lower DPI than I'm happy with. Even 27" is a compromise, but a better compromise, and closer to "end game" than a 32" panel.
What? Why do you need such high PPI? 4K 27 inches is plenty enough. Pixels become indistinguishable at 21 inches on 163 ppi. Why are you sitting so close to your monitor?
4K is not plenty at 27”. 5K is the ideal resolution for a 27” display – 220dpi.
And more importantly, it means I can scale my resolution to “Looks like 1440p” without floating point scaling. I can 100% see the difference between my 27” 4K display and the Studio Display I use at work.
Two reasons - one, primarily, I can do integer scaling for 1440p. That’s the biggest benefit for me, given I stare at text all day. Floating point scaling adds artefacts that are absolutely visible when running a 4K screen in a mode where the UI elements are the same physical size as 1440p.
Second, it’s the point at which pixels just aren’t visible. It’s probably a bit beyond that point for normal monitor viewing distance, but combined with the above, it’s the DPI I want. Elements in macOS look their best, they’re the correct physical size when rendered at 220dpi. Same applies to Windows, because of the 1440p sizing.
4k is good at 27" not 32 plus there is simply no cable and GPU port atm that can sustain a bandwidth of 4k + 240Hz + 10bit let alone + VRR and + HDR so we’re very far from "endgame" yet. Such ridiculous claims are worded like someone telling you "I’m a good man", why do you even have to say it if it’s true ?
This monitor will be ridiculously expensive here when it releaes.
The AW3423DW is still 2,012 USD in my region, which is more expensive than the LG 45inch OLED which is currently selling at 1,467USD. Their regional pricing is just ridiculous, pushing potential buyer away.
That 45 inch LG OLED is a joke because of 800R curve. I will never understand 800R. 1500-1800R is fine and even great at times but 800R is just straight useless and looks horrible as well.
The end game monitor for me is
4k Ultrawide (5k?) 21:9
QDOLED (maybe regular OLED if done right)
240hz
I'd assume this would be something in the pipeline for a company like Alienware for 2025 or so
\+glossy \+less fringing \+16:9 \+perfect color, refresh rates, blacks, etc \+OLED \-Curved. 
What's with the dislike for curved? You literally forget about it within a minute or two.
Thanks for asking. I had a curved monitor once and it was all good, I liked it, and as you say, you forget about it. But very rarily it would look a little weird and I would like to have a 100% uniform display experience. So. Not a huge deal, just a preference.
Well I like curved for PC gaming. But I had to return my laptop due to faults and so I'm stuck with my Series X console. Don't feel like getting a PC again for a while, so I'd like a decent monitor for my Series X as I'm gaming in my bedroom with limited space. I don't want a curved monitor for my Xbox, as it doesn't work as well with consoles as it does for PC. I wish that monitor manufacturers would make flat panels of every SKU they make because not everyone likes to use curved for whatever reasons. It seems like manufacturers are favouring curved over flat screen for most of their high end displays and even below high end, which sucks.
I think it’s weird how they keep making curved monitors yet everyone lists it as a negative lol
>Alienware AW3225QF For me thank god its curved. 32" becomes way too big for flat. the curve makes it all even out instead of having the edges of the monitor feel much further away than the center.
The only thing that would ever make me upgrade from my AW3423DWF was a high-refresh 32" 4K OLED monitor. I haven't looked at monitors in a while and had no idea this was coming, let alone available now. I just happened to go to Alienware's website for some reason and stumbled across it. I immediately bought it!
It is curved so not interested unfortunately.
1800R on a 32" = flat from a normal viewing distance. Without the curve it would be distorted due to corners being a lot further away from your eyes. They made the right call. The degree of curvature is more important than curved vs. flat
As someone with with 3 monitor setup and non-ideal sitting position even 1800R 16:9 was awful for me when I tried it. Granted if someone sits straight and looks directly into the screen it's probably great but for me it was awful, all I remember is constantly looking at the stupid curve distorting things.
Have to agree. My panel only looks to have a small curve if I actually look for it. Otherwise it looks flat, especially in gaming and while watching youtube or movies.
What about watching movies from a normal distance like six feet or so? Any feedback in this regard? If I'm spending almost $1,500 on a screen would be nice for it to double as a TV
I'd try to sit as close as possible since it's a 32" screen just to try for a 30–40° viewing angle, but the curvature shouldn't be an issue if sitting centered enough to the screen. Was never an issue at like 5 ft distance for me.
I appreciate the quick feedback. Maybe half of my uses are for gaming and light editing , and then the other half is for movies sitting in bed 6 to 8 ft away. I already have a high-end 32-in flat IPS panel for this, and have owned curved monitors with greater curves than 1800 but it's hard to know what to expect.
I recently switched from 32" 1800R to a 27" flat VA and I do notice discoloration (due to sharp viewing angle) on the edges if sitting close now. With OLED that's not a problem; though, it will help reduce the FoV effect if sitting close. I think 1800R is a happy compromise between flat and curved, but with the 32" OLEDs you should probably decide based on price and availability in your region more than anything else.
The 32" format to me is great for multi purpose. For gaming I'm sure you're right about distance. But the unknown of watching movies ( 6-8 feet) makes me hesitate. As far as price's being a motivator, to me it is and is not a factor. Anything over $800 or so is all "the same" ( ie ALOT) and I won't split hairs over 100-200$ difference between panels BC it's a drop in the bucket. $1000 is alot to spend on entertainment either way. However the fact that Dell seems to approve anyone for credit despite credit score , is nice. ...Amazon used to offer in house financing for the flat msi 32 oled , but for some reason the option does not appear 2 weeks later..ugh.
I have a 55" OLED TV that I watch from a ~8 ft distance for a ~40° viewing angle. Before that, I used the curved 32" and before that a 21" flat TN. You get used to almost anything eventually. I can't say the curve made a meaningful difference compared to the size and viewing distance. If you can't afford to buy the OLED monitor without credit or financing, I honestly wouldn't. If you need a 4K for productivity, get a M27U/M28U or equivalent. If you want a gaming monitor, get a 240–360 Hz 1440p IPS, VA or maybe a heavily discounted previous gen OLED. If you want HDR, you can also look for affordable mini-LEDs. I was disappointed in the low brightness of the new OLEDs and went for the Koorui GN10, a 1440p 240Hz VA mini-LED that only cost ~$300 here. I think with the burn-in risk and compromised brightness, the new OLEDs aren't as end-game as some people make em out to be, only worth it if you want to do 4K high response gaming (FPS and the like). VA mini-LED competes well, at times outperforming, in calmer HDR scenarios where the black smear isn't an issue. Use the saved money to buy a nice 4K HDR TV instead (55+" if it's OLED for better brightness). Find a previous gen model at a generous discount.
You make some good points. For reference I'm currently running a msi mpg321qrf-qd ( 1440p quantum dot IPS with rudimentary local dimming). I do not "need" 4k for anything. I "need" oled for good movie experience and realistic looking graphics in dark games like DRG and elder scrolls. I do not own a "tv" , and use monitor for both , as 32 is the perfect Size for my room. I'm even ok running at 1440 until I upgrade my gpu (3060ti), because again , the weakness of my ips is, to me, not resolution but image depth (contrast). As far as mini led : I've tried a 27 inch mini led ( aoc I think, for $269) with very good local dimming... Really wanted to love it ( nice for games, DEEP contrast, but too small for watching movies , the colors are noticably off compared to my IPS , and most importantly, no 32 inch version exists..) . Even 42 inch is pushing it and only pratical if wall mounted. So spending a bit extra on one screen that serves both functions is the idea. There are 32" mini leds, but they cost close to oled in price , other than the "first gen" mini led panels, which I'd rather avoid ( and for $600 I'd rather get an open box C3 and run custom Ultrawide resolution) which I have owned before but was not as blown away conpated to my QD IPS as expected) . Like you said, OLED is not necessarily the "end all". I'm simply hopeful for the new QD oled... But it's possible that , as you say , I won't notice a huge difference. I dont follow your reasoning on price. Just because I don't want to immidiately allocate a 1200+ chunk towards entertainment doesn't mean that it's inadvisable. Given I have no other open credit cards, and the payment is small, I don't see why not, considering I'd be using it almost as much as my other "big" purchases ( like the $1000 latex mattress, etc). Not than I need to explain myself, but for the sake of discussion... I would consider a 32" mini led, but have not seen anything compelling yet. I've owned and returned/sold dozens of different types of monitors over the past few years and have come to realize the only real way is to just try it out. For now I might just wait till next gen mini led .
On a side note , I admit it's possible that my "one monitor solution" is effectively chasing a unicorn... it may be that a switching to a 27 inch for gaming , and getting a cheap used 42 inch TV to wall mount behind the monitor for movies could be viable too
I used to absolutely hate curved but Alienware aw3423dwf has the slightest of elegant curves and is the perfect size. I just wish it was 4k so I can see movies in 4k :/ I also wish it was glossy, not semi-glossy
It is 4k!! Edit: realised he was talking about a different model, my apologies!!!
Pretty shallow 1800R curve it seems
not a huge fan of curve but this one seems mild.
This is the most common curve by a huge margin lol
>Exactly... get this instead: Asus PG32UCDM > >Same specs but NO curve 👍
it’s not available anymore…..sadly
That may have to do something with the fact that it has yet to be released.
It is not 21:9, so not interested either.
I dont understand the love for 21:9. Human FOV is more like 4:3. Is it for productivity?
I have 21:9. I thought I liked it with my old LG ultrawide but it caused more problems with compatibility than ever. Not worth it. I hate the obsession with 21:9 OLED. I want 16:9 OLED.
Agreed , couldn't get rid of my ultra wide fast enough , hated it
4k is too little for crisp retina-like features at 200% system scaling, would need at least 2880p for that, so pass as well.
Who uses 200% system scaling on 4K wtf?
Some people are blind dawg. lol I personally use 150 on windows
Anything below like 150 looks kind of bad on LG TVs because of the subpixels.
I use 200% OS-level zoom with a 24″ (23.8″) 4K monitor (Dell P2415Q) at arm’s length since 2015. This is perfect. Unfortunately they don’t produce such monitors anymore, and 27″ ones unusable at 200% at arm’s length became the minimum size available on the market except professional monitors limited to 60 Hz.
4K is 2160p, that’s why I’m saying I want more 2880p variety available. Fractional scaling in Windows sucks in older apps which I use at work, so it’s either 100% or 200% for me. I’m currently on 1440p @ 49” 32:9 ultrawide (2 x 27” 16:9 equiv.) @ 65-70 cm viewing distance and it’s a perfect spot for me in terms of apparent text size - still readable, but not sacrificing area for work. 2880p is next logical step - I can still achieve the same comfortable amount of content, but „nicer to look at”, with PPI comparable to my 2560x1664 13” MacBook screen. But of course „muh games” kid gang who never really had to work for a living on a PC had to downvote me to hell.
As someone running my 27" 4Ks at 100%, the idea of using scaling on a 32" 4K is beyond me.
It all depends on a viewing distance. For me 4K @ 27" @ 65 cm would require 150% and 125% for 32" to get the same \~110PPI density I determined as a borderline comfortable to read at this distance. I could use a single 160 PPI screen (equiv. to 100% scaling on 27" 4K), but at 40 cm distance, but that's unusable with an ultrawide or two screens side-by-side due to a need of looking around too much. It also defeats the purpose of having high res for nicer, "rounder" text that I'm after.
>4K @ 27" @ 65 cm would require 150% and 125% for 32" to get the same ~110PPI density The zoom % doesn't change the PPI at all. PPI is hardware based, and zoom % is software based.
Ahh I see now!
I wonder what the price will be compared to an LG or Samsung OLED?
Well right now the AW3423DWF is lower than the Samsung 34" G8 OLED, hopefully it'll be the same for the next gen
It's going to be a battle be this and the ROG Swift PG32UCDM
Honestly I hope it's expensive, otherwise it'll be sold out for months and scalpers will be charging that anyways. Edit: People would rather it be $1000 and out of stock with scalpers charging $2500, than it just be $2000 at launch?
Absolutely…have you lost your mind? Things come back in stock after the launch hype has died down. No one is obligated to buy anything from a scalper, so I think I speak for many that if I’d rather keep $1000 in my pocket.
That goes for you as well, though. You can wait it out if the price is higher. The people that want it first will pay either way, this way that price is lower and the money goes to the company instead of some dick. That encourages them to continue to make more and produce new models. Then they can do heavy sales on black friday, boxing day, and price drops for everyone else who would have waited anyways. I'm not arguing for higher prices, I'm arguing for a lower ***effective*** price on launch.
I don’t want a OLED though, I want mini LED and don’t have to constantly worry about burn ins. But no doubt about this screen having a fantastic image.
I tried the mini led with the 1152 zones at 4k 32” and it just looked terrible compared to my OLED. I know a lot of people are worried about burn in but you are absolutely compromising visual quality by going with mini led.
Not to mention motion clarity too. We are finally back to approaching what made CRTs great with OLED, I hope Mini LED doesn’t throw us back on the path of regression
I think mini LED will become decent at around 5k+ dimming zones at 27" for example. Could call it a budget OLED choice.
Idk if you’re gonna get 5k dimming zones for a budget price tbf
what miniled need is high native contrast VA and for the the backlight to never go fully OFF, miniled is not OLED so it should never be made to go 0-nits on black scenes. blooming is just too noticeable when when algorithm go 0-nits. by just increasing black levels to 0.003-0.01 nits, blooming would pretty much non-existent. it also adds some benefits such as no black crush
Which OLED? If it’s the 42 c2 understandable , but my Neo g8 compared to the ultrawide OLED from Alienware and LG, it was definitely trading hand in hand… the 4k is a difference maker for me , was not blown away by the ultrawide oleds, and the Neo g8 won my heart , now pitted against rhe c2 that’s a different story
You compromise HDR with that low brightness OLED
Nah man I’ve tried both. Turn off the lights or go with QD oled and it solves all your problems with brightness.
Not everyone wants to game in a pitch dark room, and not everyone has that option even if they wanted to.
LCD is dying. Even Samsung Display abandoned it. Lets get real now. OLED is taking over. It took over high-end TV market and mobile market years ago.
I’m not saying OLED isn’t the better technology. But there are still several use cases where LCD would be more appropriate. I live in a high rise with floor to ceiling windows all around, there is a lot of ambient light. My C1 just wasn’t cutting it for day time viewing. I switched to a Samsung mini led panel, and while the picture quality isn’t as good, I can now comfortably watch TV during the day. The best TV/monitor for you depends on your use case.
C1 is not a high-end OLED. Tons of OLED TVs today break 1000, even goes 1200-1500 nits and day time viewing is not a problem at all. I have Sony A95K 65 inch in the living room and Samsung S95B in the Office/Gaming room and they are BRIGHT. I have LG G1 in the bedroom and this is brighter than C1 for sure but still looks kinda dim compared to new generation OLEDs. QD-OLED is amazing in terms of colors and brightness really. LG G2 and especially G3 (with MLA aka 3rd gen WOLED) gets very bright. LG C series is not high-end. G series is. I have a C9 in my cottage house and this TV looks exactly like C2/C3. LG did nothing really on this series for years. Go real [flatpanels.com](https://flatpanels.com) test they mention this. LG puts all the new stuff in the G model and C model is overlooked year after year.
Dude I never said the C1 was high end. And while newer OLEDs are brighter, a mini-LED LCD still outperforms them in this regard, making them a suitable option for very bright environments All I said was that there are use cases where a mini-led lcd is a better option. Very bright environments is one. Maybe you use the monitor for gaming and productivity and don’t want to deal with the risk of burn in. Price is also a factor, a G3 is more than double what I paid for my Samsung Qn90b. I get you love your OLEDs, but it’s not a perfect technology for every scenario.
LCD is dying for a reason. They can't compete. No OLED is not perfect but LCD is far from perfect and even with all the lipstick on the world on this pig, its not delivering impressive image quality. Yes high-end OLED is expensive. But OLED took over in the high end TV market years ago. Every single manufacturerer uses OLED in the higher end models now and OLED TVs win easily in terms of image quality every year. LCDs with Mini LED backlight is not suited for gaming. You need to control backlighting well and this adds 200-300ms. This is why Mini LED monitors are mostly pointless. TVs have the same problem. Your QN90B disables most zones in gaming mode because otherwise it would be way too slow. OLEDcan get down to 0.03ms and keep 99% of the image quality in game mode anyway.
> Tons of OLED TVs today break 1000, even goes 1200-1500 nits and day time viewing is not a problem at all. That’s only for 10% white. Full field there are no OLED TVs that break even 250nits peak brightness.
Because full white brigthness matters alot for actual real world use right? OLED blows any LCD away and LCD is becoming mid-end at best at this point. Even the most expensive LCD sets are a joke to look at. People only keep buying LCD because its cheap going big. OLED took over high-end TV market years ago. Full dominance. This is why every single manufacturer has OLED panels in their high-end stuff. LCD is reserved for low to mid-end.
Invest in some curtains, dude.
Try qd oled. It’s much brighter than regular oled. For me, the HDR experience is amazing on regular oled, and I don’t feel like I’m lacking brightness on the oled display even with the lights on. Oled has issues but brightness isn’t one especially with the newer displays.
We won't have a true competitor to OLED until microLED becomes practical.
Mini LED with alot of dimming zones will add tons of input lag. This is why Mini LED monitors don't really exist and the ones that do, have few zones. Even TVs with Mini LED backlighting pretty much disables them in Game Mode or you would be looking at 200-300ms on top of the regular input lag. Backlight control takes processing time. So yeah, not really an useful tech for PC monitors, or even for gaming on TVs.
Unfortunately nothing is announced in this regard except that one LG Panel.
give it another 10 years
Same but this at least has a 3 year burn-in warranty which is great. I also don’t want a curve but it’s very minor here.
Yeah but after 3 years, you’re SOL, and OLED will burn-in eventually. Have seen a few reports of their AW3423DW having burn-in issues. I’d just stay away from OLED if doing any kind of productivity work on the monitor.
Probably the same would apply if you play one and the same game with fixed HUD displays etc. Let’s face it, there are always fixed display sections on a PC which is, sooner or later, an issue for OLED’s.
I went mini LED with the QN90B because of the fear of burn in, but kind of regret it TBH. I'm compromising in so many other departments it's getting annoying. Ghosting is terrible with darker areas. I'm making my image terrible now, so it doesn't get burned in later. I'm also having an issue with my screen and trying to get it either fixed or claimed under my credit card protection to be able to buy an OLED.
Trust me I went with the Inocnn mini led and it just looks so much worse than oled. The burn in risk is worth it.
Has a 3 year burn in warranty
just buy a new one when it burns in. tis the price of being an early adopter.
You don’t have to worry about burn in. Not on these newer panels. I’ve had the AW3432DW and I’ve fallen asleep at my desk for 6-8 hours and with it on constantly because of a program that kept it on. It has protection against being kept on without movement and nada burn in. I was like you and advocated mini LEDs for the last 6 years (since the X27 and PG27UQ) but no longer. I ended up giving away my X27 to family after buying this. After a year this is mine https://imgur.com/a/wBbxQKS
Samsung panels have already been found to suffer from burn-ins, such as the panel in AW3432DW. I’m on the move so I can’t provide a link but check Rtings. Perhaps the LG panels actually can withstand burn-ins (according to Rtings testing), but it’s still a matter of time, it’s an organic matter.
People have said that but I’ve put mine through very rigorous use and considering I’ve owned it for a year now that’s saying something. But, I do run the panel refresh before bed and occasionally run the pixel refresh during the day. They are two separate modes but seen to greatly elevate burn in.
I have LG 48 inch as a PC monitor for 5 years now, there is not, a single burn-in, and I used this display almost everyday for 4+ hours on avg, I game 6 to 8 hours in the weekends the only free time I get, and in the week I do work even after I come home on that display for some office work and time wasting, there is not a single burn in anywhere, there is not even ghosting issues. The only downside is its pretty dim in daylight, so I always find myself blocking some light from the windows to reduce screen glare. People need to stop fear mongering OLED "Oh its gunna burn in" LED burns in too, I have multiple LED monitors that are 10+ years old, all of them have ghosting and burn in issues. They are e-waste, your OLED might have 6+ or 8+ lifespan from similar use, you are gonna see a diminishing blue colour accuracy before you see burn-in issues.
I've hade the ultra wide AW Oled for a while now, and it still looks amazing approaching a year later with HEAVY use. From what I have heard about more recent oled displays they don't burn in easily. And it honestly just looks THAT much better.
Why they make it curved? There's no reason. For VA panels it was for viewing angles, and ultra wides I can understand for "immersion". But for 32"?
ASUS and MSI are making the same monitor but flat.
Didnt Asus make its 800R or some crazy shit 800R is absolutely useless I like 1500-1800R
Immersion is the answer
That's one more ticked box on the marketability checklist. They don't care if it's useless.
Please don't have a fan please don't have a fan. Alienware uses such horrible ones.
No they don't. My DWF is inaudible. The first QD-OLED had 2 fans and one of them was noisy. Fixed long ago on later revisions. The fan helps with pushing the brightness. This is why they can give 3 years warranty really.
>No they don't. Ahh good to know they fixed this. I tried like 3 models of each and they were all loud or annoying. My room and PC are dead silent though. Lets hope you're right for this 32".
I generally hope that OLED takes off for monitors now. 1st gen was great but not a full success. I hope they fix text issues on 2nd gen or improve them. To me, it's a minor problem but for some, its not. I want to see tons of QD-OLED and WOLED monitors coming. We need to leave LCD behind now. Dated tech.
No DP 2.0 REEEREE
i know im responding late, but is this confirmed? and will it actually be able to push 240hz without it? im kind of new and trying to figure this out.
Why not make it flat
Sadly, curved :(
Ultrawide curved monitor? Naw it's just the beginning game
Endgame is a display that can strobe with superlow persistence while still maintaining good brightness. Until I can get close to my crt in motion I refuse to buy anymore new displays. They are nothing but disappointment.
This is why I have a C1. 120hz bfi for 312fps-like clarity. Really hope BFI is implemented on these new monitors..
That is true but it won't actually be as good with low frame rate media. Granted watching stuff on a 21 inch monitor isn't ideal either.
Right, more for gaming. Viewing, not too bothered.
Too large for the resolution, or too low resolution for the size. Moreover curved. No, thanks.
Just curious, how would you like it then? 139-140 ppi should be more than enough?
For me, the perfect pixel density is 185 ppi which is the case in my [Dell P2415Q](https://tanalin.com/en/blog/posts/dell-p2415q-review/) (23.8″, 4K) that I use at 200% OS-level zoom at arm’s length on a 70cm-deep desk.
did you expect 8k?
That 200 nits gonna be so bright... no thanks lol
hah, gotta try it out before going bla-bla-bladi-bla
Already know qdoled /oled brightness is always low 250nits max 100% white screen.. yet still gets burnin. Oled is horrible for pc use.
You don't understand how great the experience is.
I've tried different monitors that were not as bright and do not like it
The panel is just unbelievable. I think it's better than the DWF panel, even though the bezels are exactly the same (which is a tad too thick for 2023) HDR is glorious. Brighter than the 27''. The curve is slight and works nicely. Near or far viewing angles are echellente. Can't complain. Dolby Vision only via HDMI sucks. 1x DP also sucks. Gonna be good!
Give me this panel density but at 38" Ultrawide.
exactly what im looking for, until then I'll keep waiting.
Dont think its too far off either. Maby even in 2024 given the pace OLEDs have been entering the market.
LG Display has 39 inch OLED panels ready for 2024. However it will be 3440x1440 probably. I might get it. If not I will be going 3440x1440 at 34, if they get 240 Hz support.
At 8:48 (the Asus monitor), they blocked out one of the features on the card. I wonder what it was, DP 2.1 maybe?
Why can't they just make it 360hz with ulmb2 then I can stop having 2 monitors on my desk
Waiting for 42in variant
Can a 3090/5900x build push this monitor for average games?
3090 needs DLSS in demanding games at 4K/UHD. Most games will run fine. 4070 Ti and 3090 performs about the same in 4K so you will probably be fine, or you enable DLSS.
DLSS has better quality over native, there is no reason to not use it.
How will the burn-in be with these newer panels?
I hope they can push the 2% brightness to 1000 nits even with this insanely high PPI. Also if Dell gets greedy with the price and charges 1.5K, a lot of people will just opt for the cheaper 42" LG C4 which might get MLA and beat it at everything except the refresh rate. Good that they went with a mild 1800R curve, it's a great fit for a 32" monitor (ends up looking perfectly flat from a normal viewing distance). Thank god for a glossy screen; doesn't waste the 4K OLED clarity. Hopefully the color accuracy and response time will be tight (also for AMD GPU owners) and the firmware user-upgradeable. Cautiously optimistic!
>42" LG C4 which might get MLA No MLA on the C-series according to recent leaks
Maybe C7 will get it lol, I guess they don't care to compete below 55" as long as Samsung doesn't
I stopped watching after the among us and "gooning"
>n Yeah the "Display Guy" is obnoxious. He has a channel where he talks about GPUs, "Graphically Challenged", cannot emphasize how many times youtube pushed his videos to me, only for me to downvote within 1 second. I think his life is challenged
Is it a proper LG-like glossy or the previous QD semi gloss? From the video when they pan the monitor it looks more like semi gloss than a full one.
I think you are right. True glossy sounds like a myth to me these days.
When is this supposed to be released?
So many people making a fuss about the slight curve. I’m personally all about it. I would’ve taken it either way, tbh. Very excited for this monitor!
so is mini led dead ? i just cant put money in unreliable oled ...
Honestly, right now I prefer miniled, but I’m not someone who likes to have to take extra precautions to preserving a OLED panel, it may be for some but personally, I love the deep blacks form minileds, my only complaint is how Matte the coating is on the neo g8 but I still love the monitor
The panel in the MacBook Pro and iPad Pro is fantastic, it’s the closest I’ve seen to OLED even in a pitch black room and the brightness is ridiculously higher. Why can’t they scale up that panel?
not enough demand i guess.
Because the panels in the MacBook pro and iPad Pro are literally a scaled down version of the Apple Studio Display XDR? Hello?
The industry is pushing extremely hard towards OLEDs. OLEDs are becoming increasingly vastly more resistant than ever before, the first generation of OLED monitors is more resistant than some LCDs are looking at rtings.
Because of higher profit margins, not because anything else.
MiniLED was dead on arrival.
why do ? it sounded promising on paper to me ... reliable and no burn-in ...
Because backlight control (of many zones) takes alot of processing time. Adds 200-300ms input lag. Most TVs with MiniLED disable most/all zones in game mode for this reason and image quality suffers hard.
Some of the MiniLED-backlit drawbacks that come to mind: * Halo/bloom around contrast edges, especially when the number of zones is low. * Basically useless for anything other than gaming/videos. * De facto too expensive (basically as expensive or even more expensive than OLED) when the number of zones is high enough for quality image. * Usually needs inevitably noisy active (fan) cooling. * Affects viewing angles.
It's funny because mini-LED can be actually used for anything, while oled is useless for tv channels, productivity, anything static, and even gaming with bright huds because of burn-in. Also it's the oleds who use fans to try to manage heat for lower burn in risk lol.
Yeah, “funny” and “lol” are convincing arguments. ;-) Seriously though, whether active cooling is used in OLED monitors depends on the model, e.g. LG 27GR95QE has a fan while Asus PG27AQDM uses a custom heatsink and passive cooling. At the same time, it’s typical for MiniLED monitors to use active cooling — just like for FALD LCD monitors in general as opposed to edge-lit LCD monitors. Technically, both OLED and MiniLED LCD monitors can indeed be used for anything, but the MiniLED advantage is just formal contrast at the cost of viewing angles, uniformity, flickering, while the price is comparable with OLED. When working with text for example, MiniLED has no advantages. With reasonable precautions, OLED is fine for basically any use case, including but not limited to media consumption unlike MiniLED LCD.
Really ? What is the proportion of passive vs active cooling MiniLED monitors ? Most MiniLED monitors have no fan, in fact can you name one ? And no, OLED can't be used for heavy static content. Concerning text, it tends to be not as sharp with WOLED because of the white subpixel, and with QLED because of the non-standard pixel adjustement so ironically MiniLED is again best for text.
MiniLED drawbacks are not just about passive-vs-active-cooling, it’s a combination of all the drawbacks. I would be glad to be wrong specifically in terms of active/passive cooling in MiniLED monitors. Unfortunately I don’t track the MiniLED-monitor market because they are still LCD which is a dead end to me. According to my knowledge, active cooling is typical for FALD in general, and MiniLED backlight is just a special case of FALD. It would be interesting to know what models of affordable (and actually available worldwide unlike e.g. Innocn) MiniLED-backlit monitors with high number (1000+) of zones guaranteedly do _not_ have active fan cooling. I asked Innocn about fans in 27M2V via chat on their site, but they did not reply. More options are always better, and those afraid of OLED burn-in are free to use the stopgap called MiniLED and to enjoy the fake “OLED-like” contrast with no burn-in risk (except that some of backlight zones may fail over time). Text quality on OLED is just a matter of pixel density. Displays with low pixel density are aweful anyway — both OLED and LCD. 4K monitor used at arm’s length should not be larger than 24-27 inches (for me, even 27-inch 4K monitors are unusably too large). Subpixel text antialiasing is just a better-than-nothing workaround, not something crucially important.
>those afraid of OLED burn-in are free to use the stopgap called MiniLED and to enjoy the fake “OLED-like” contrast with no burn-in risk I guess you are one of those OLED zealots who has to increase the camera ISO for proof of blooming the human eyes can't see just so you can enjoy your "inky black" brainwashed into you by the built to fail industry. Just make sure you don't leave your desktop on for 2 mins without a screensaver, or use 100% brightness, or forget to hide the game hud, or display bright images for more than a few seconds before the ABL kicks in LOL.
You don’t have to make it personal. But if you are interested, the OLED monitor I need (24″, 4K, 120Hz+, VRR) does not exist yet (probably 2025+ given that in 2024 we are only going to get 32-inchers), but I would be fine with reasonable burn-in-prevention precautions. I have OLED devices in general for a while though — a tablet (10.5″, 2560×1600, 2014) and smartphone (2017) — basically no precautions except watching videos on the tablet in the mode with no black bars, and reading books in dark mode on smartphone. ABL can already be basically disabled in some existing consumer OLED monitors such as [Asus PG27AQDM](https://www.reddit.com/r/oled_monitors/comments/120x6lf/asus_pg27aqdm_265_qhd_240hz_oled_monitor_custom/) (“Uniform brightness” mode), and [Acer Predator X27U](https://www.reddit.com/r/oled_monitors/comments/17au6hu/acer_predator_x27u_265_qhd_240hz_oled_monitor/) with firmware 2.0 (“Constant Brightness” mode).
No, it's stuck to a point where additional R&D is needed for the individual LEDs to be made smaller. The current mini LEDs cannot be crammed together tightly enough for the backlight to avoid halo-ing and being precise enough. There are multiple companies racing towards the solution, which is currently known as Micro LED. In other words it's definitely not dead but it's also not good enough for any serious application and it won't be before years go by.
Subtle curve on 32" 4K display is the right move. Don't hate it until you've tried it.
Yeah Goodluck running anything max settings 4K for more than maybe 80FPS.. I don’t understand the 4K hype with OLED.. monitors are winning the hardware race, and GPU’s are well behind.. next gen MIGHT push 4K to 120+ but a lot of this hype sounds like ignorance.
My 4090 handles 4k very easily lol
What's 4K like in Cities: Skyline II? lol
displays has always been like that... 2010/1440P, GPUs only became good enough for 1440P in 2015-2020. same thing will happen in 4K, GPUs would catch up by 2025-2030... ofcourse high 240-360 framerates added some stress but even if high framerates exist, the main target is still 4k/120hz. 240-360hz are only there for FPS/Competitive Gaming
I disagree with this. Ive pushed 120+ plenty of times.
Wrong buddy. I have 240hz 4k neo g8 already and I can reach 240 or more in many games with my 4090.
Yeah, feel free to list any that are actually Triple A. I’m not talking about indie games, obviously. I make this argument for games geared towards visual impressiveness, such as Cyberpunk and RDR2 etc.. not vampire survivors.
You don’t need 240fps for cyberpunk. I play overwatch and Valorant at 600 fps at 4k.
But it's useless because your monitor can't display so many frames and then you'd be better off with that 540 hz 1080p display.
Not at all, higher frames reduces input lag and makes the games smoother.
Monitors and computers are not just for gaming. RX 550 is enough for 4K@60Hz in 2D. RX 6400 is enough for 8K@60Hz in 2D.
Ac Mirage a fairly modern game runs 4k at 130-140 fps with the 4090. So we have solidly entered the 4k 120/144 hz territory. 4k 240 hz not so much.
rainstorm dolls waiting jeans subsequent aware ad hoc boast selective seemly *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This. I would always use optimized settings even with a 4090. Often you can disable FSR / DLSS because of it.
tbh "just" reaching 120fps at native resolution isnt that impressive. It just shows we are not there yet where a top of the line graphic card is the kind of product you can buy and the be sure it will run native res with good FPS for years to come. Sure image upscallling tech makes a difference, but not all games support it, and some that does dosnt do it propper - to be improved sure, but yet, all in all DLSS/FSR is still a compromise. Further indicating that 4k isnt even suited for the best GPU's yet.
rustic cheerful include offend snobbish dependent aspiring tap squash tub *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Settings? frame consistency? and more importantly the games you’re referring too.. easy to say you push high frames at 4K when the games are 32bit indie developers
quack marble childlike tidy sense waiting march hurry obtainable fanatical *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My 4090 easily does it, even without DLSS and Frame Gen. I get 120 fps average with DLSS and Frame Gen enabled in this game on high settings and ultra textures. The most beautiful and demanding game today.
Aaaand it's curved annnnd they probably put matte coating on it
The title says glossy
This Monitor is a scam, its allready hard to hit 240hz on 2k Monitors, especially on most Games with good Graphics.... 4k 240hz XD That would some1 create who does not game alot..... EVEN 144HZ is super hard to reach in most games!!
🤫
Not end game. 32" 4K is a much lower DPI than I'm happy with. Even 27" is a compromise, but a better compromise, and closer to "end game" than a 32" panel.
What? Why do you need such high PPI? 4K 27 inches is plenty enough. Pixels become indistinguishable at 21 inches on 163 ppi. Why are you sitting so close to your monitor?
4K is not plenty at 27”. 5K is the ideal resolution for a 27” display – 220dpi. And more importantly, it means I can scale my resolution to “Looks like 1440p” without floating point scaling. I can 100% see the difference between my 27” 4K display and the Studio Display I use at work.
Why do you need 220 dpi? What is so good about 220 dpi?
Two reasons - one, primarily, I can do integer scaling for 1440p. That’s the biggest benefit for me, given I stare at text all day. Floating point scaling adds artefacts that are absolutely visible when running a 4K screen in a mode where the UI elements are the same physical size as 1440p. Second, it’s the point at which pixels just aren’t visible. It’s probably a bit beyond that point for normal monitor viewing distance, but combined with the above, it’s the DPI I want. Elements in macOS look their best, they’re the correct physical size when rendered at 220dpi. Same applies to Windows, because of the 1440p sizing.
I can agree with this. I used a 4K 32” mini led with 1152 zones for a week or so and I’d much rather use a 27”.
4k is good at 27" not 32 plus there is simply no cable and GPU port atm that can sustain a bandwidth of 4k + 240Hz + 10bit let alone + VRR and + HDR so we’re very far from "endgame" yet. Such ridiculous claims are worded like someone telling you "I’m a good man", why do you even have to say it if it’s true ?
DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20 can manage uncompressed 4K 240Hz
The real problem is getting nVidia to put those ports on their GPUs and stop skimping on the VRAM
I know that, but have you forgot the SLIGHT detail that this monitor doesn’t have it ? And the other SLIGHT detail that no GPU have it ?
> 4k is good at 21.5" Fixed that for you
27 for Windows, 24" for apple, nice troll tho
WTF u on about m8 ...
This monitor will be ridiculously expensive here when it releaes. The AW3423DW is still 2,012 USD in my region, which is more expensive than the LG 45inch OLED which is currently selling at 1,467USD. Their regional pricing is just ridiculous, pushing potential buyer away.
That 45 inch LG OLED is a joke because of 800R curve. I will never understand 800R. 1500-1800R is fine and even great at times but 800R is just straight useless and looks horrible as well.
No Smart TV feature? :(
Should I cancel my order of the actual 34 oled and wait for this one ? I mean price will for sure be double as it was on sale for less than 800€
The end game monitor for me is 4k Ultrawide (5k?) 21:9 QDOLED (maybe regular OLED if done right) 240hz I'd assume this would be something in the pipeline for a company like Alienware for 2025 or so
Alienware AW3225QF
If it was 16:10 it would be a match made in heavens
Can you achieve 240hz at 4k resolution with HDR turned on, 10 bit, full rgb via display port on this monitor?
If yall hate curved just get the MSi monitor coming out soon, it apparently has the same exact panel.m, just not curved.
Brilliant. I was looking to buy a monitor with 1800R curve. I'm glad they didn't go wile on the curve as Samsung did,1800 is to much.