Acer’s Z35 Ultrawide Curved Display Promises 200 Hz G-Sync, sRGB Color

[JamesSneed]

Its an AMVA panel which would be good for gamers. This also means the whole statement about graphics artists can be removed from this article because nobody serious about color work would use a panel that has color shifts on off axis viewing which all AMVA panels do. So its a $1K gaming monitor that does 100% sRGB which makes it a little bit of a weird beast if you ask me.

 

[toddybody]

i dont see much of a point running gsync on 200 hz. gsync is only usefull on low fps. why would u run a game at low fps on a 200 hz monitor.

I did a ULMB vs G-Sync "Quality Test" last night on my monitor...wondering if high enough hz made G-Sync superfluous/worse against ULMB.

While the "wow" smoothing factor of G-Sync seemed diminished against naturally high fps with ULMB...I still noticed the occasional screen tears which G-Sync handles like a champ. I'd still argue G-Sync is valuable at higher refresh rates. Cheers Mate

 

[Marius Cirsta]

At $350 this would be able to compete with the LG Freesync 34". Nobody is going to pay 3X simply because of a preference for nvidia and the curvature.

Lol, you'd be surprised how much people pay for stuff that seems useless. It all depends on the money you have. If you've got plenty to spend then $1100 is not that much. Moreover some people feel the need to spend a lot and need small premium features to justify spending 3-4 times more.

Sure I paid 3x times more for it but look, it's curved ... see , means I got something cool ... It's the same for cars and such, you can get a decent car for say $20 000 or pay $ 60 000 for not much more but hey that one looks like a $ 60 000 and it's got these things to show off and that you really, really need yeah

 

[photonboy]

200Hz and gaming:

A lot of comments above seem not to understand that in asynchronous mode it doesn't matter what FPS the card can output.

Getting about 50FPS average? Fine.

Getting 150FPS average? Fine.

200Hz would be problematic if you were running VSYNC on a normal monitor (or your card doesn't support asynchronous mode) because then you'd have to be CAPABLE of outputting 200FPS (or force "half vsync" at 100FPS).

200Hz also means a smooth desktop experience as well. At PCPER they said around 165Hz a desktop had a "fluid" feel to cursor movement that wasn't obvious even at 144Hz.

200Hz also means less motion blur (in desktop, gaming is whatever the GPU puts out).

 

[fizbiniii]

200Hz and gaming:

A lot of comments above seem not to understand that in asynchronous mode it doesn't matter what FPS the card can output.

Getting about 50FPS average? Fine.

Getting 150FPS average? Fine.

200Hz would be problematic if you were running VSYNC on a normal monitor (or your card doesn't support asynchronous mode) because then you'd have to be CAPABLE of outputting 200FPS (or force "half vsync" at 100FPS).

200Hz also means a smooth desktop experience as well. At PCPER they said around 165Hz a desktop had a "fluid" feel to cursor movement that wasn't obvious even at 144Hz.

200Hz also means less motion blur (in desktop, gaming is whatever the GPU puts out).

todays single graphics cards arent capable of high frame rates on any demanding games on ultra anyways. sli and crossfire are garbage at best. a 200hz monitor doesnt need it. why would someone use vsync on frame rate they cant get. ridiculous. CS go maybe

 

[ak47jar3d]

200 hz?!? I guess believe when I see it....

 

[photonboy]

fizbiniii,
I don't think you understood my post which is ironic because I even said a lot of comments "seem not to understand" what's going on.

I actually said 200Hz would be PROBLEMATIC for gaming if using VSYNC.

You can achieve it on the desktop and that does make things a lot smoother for the cursor and helps reduce motion blur.

So with asynchronous mode (GSYNC) you can easily stay within 200FPS and not worry about being capped when gaming (hitting 200FPS on some titles especially with newer GPU's isn't going to be very hard), but for the desktop you get a smooth experience.

200Hz does serve a purpose. If you don't understand that, then you need to go back and understand the technology a bit more.

 

[fil1p]

It's nice to see more curved monitors being released, it will hopefully start driving the price down. Unfortunately at this resolution (2560*1080) with a size of 35' the pixel density is very low. Quite dissapointing.

 

[rantoc]

1080 line resolutions are so the 90's...

 

[Guest]

The price is high, due mostly to the G-Sync feature... Useless above 100 FPS? This monitor boasts 200Hz capability, but it's (G-Sync) is there for those who need it.

Those speaking of the pixel density, 1080p being of a poor rez/old-school rez, etc. There is a setting in NV Panel called "DSR". Not quite exactly like the real-deal higher rez's you can purchase for same or lower price... BUT it is certainly not a gimmicky or gimped option either AND can be utilized with the Z35.

1080p is not low-def or a poor rez folks, unless you've got a poor-quality monitor to begin with; bad contrast, colors, backlighting, etc. Cranking up the settings in-game DOES improve graphics quality quite a bit (and depending on title, drastically), that's why they're there, so use them!

Show a 1440p or higher-rez monitor that can boast up to 200Hz refresh rate, 35" of viewing real estate, 100% SRGB color gamut, incredible contrast, 2000R curvature and with a better overall display (+'s and -'s included) for gaming than TN or IPS displays; the Z35 is an AMVA panel.

Am I stating this is the greatest gaming monitor of all time? No... But, it does offer some interesting points, as previously stated.

The REAL issue here is (along with pricing)... is seeing how Acer's quality-control holds up on this monitor.

 

[cobra5000]

1080? No thank you.

 

[mitcHELLspawn]

So I recently bought Acers previous predator ultrawide... The Predator x34. Its a 34 inch 3440x1440 ips curved Gsync panel with a refresh rate of 100hz (comes stock at 75 and then you have to go into the settings to set it to 100) And I have got to say, I have had a lot of monitors in my day... This thing takes the cake. It truly is a revelation. Before I bought this monitor, I was running the Acer XB280HK. Thats the 4k G-sync TN panel by acer. It was a great experience playing games in 4k for close to a year. Rocking SLI titanX Hybrids with custom bios Ive been able to max out practically all games at 60fps. That being said, 21:9 is like a whole new ball game, and I TRULY hope that its where PC gaming monitor tech is heading. 4k is great, but doesnt really add anything to the experience. 21:9 on the other hand is amazing for immersion. The slight curve is perfect as well. The unfortunate thing is, it seems there has been some quality control issues as per usual with these enthusiast grade monitors for some reason. Its not just Acer but Asus and others as well. I dont know whats up with that.... Thankfully I got an absolutely incredible one. The only slight negative I can say is there is minor IPS glow in the corners when the screen is completely black, but its really something you cant get away from with an IPS panel. The only, and I mean only time you can see it is say when a game is loading, and it goes to a black screen briefly. During any gameplay, even when its extremely dark on screen, its still not noticable. So for me, thats fine.

All that being said, I think the z35 is kind of a bust. For me at least. At that size, The pixel density is just not enough. Thats a really large screen. The sweet spot really is that 3440x1440. Which is what? around 3/5th of the pixels of 4k or there about. Honestly, I havent noticed much if any difference in clarity. Next, I just dont see the point in the 200Hz. More of a gimmick than anything I suppose. I personally can't tell the difference between 100FPS and 144FPS, though Im sure some can. The difference between 60 and 100 is obvious and has an impact, but to me anything higher is not needed...

and DAMN is that ugly. Like someone else said, don't make a monitor this expensive look like its targeted at teenagers. The people who can afford and buy enthusiast grade gear like this are young adults to middle age adults. This kind of stuff is not appealing to me in the least. I actually find the steel look of the x34 very nice. It looks incredible on my desk.

 

[Topper_1]

WoW they are still making horrible monitors, suckering the noobs for hard earned cash. 1080 monitor resolution is total garbage. I could never watch or play anything on something that doesn't do a minimum of 1920x1200. They made it wider but still chopped of the bottom of the resolution with 1080, what a waste. I haven't used anything less then 1920x1200 for more then a decade now, ive tried a few 1080's but the screen stretch it does and chops off most environment details vs a 1200 their is just no way to chose a 1080 in today's world. Cheapo monitors are 1080, real monitors do 1920x1200 or larger. Dont ever by a monitor that has 1080 hype its garbage for more then 50 bucks, your getting ripped off. Seriouly play some games at 1920x1200 and same at 1920x1080 they all claim, and soon you will never play 1080 again. Even my old apple 21 in CRT from 1997 does 1920x1200, lol garabge 1080 hype so manufactures can be cheap on parts and sell trash, when video for decades on computers scales well past 1080. Computers are not like movies 1080p scaling, they dont have limitations as such, buying into the false hype of 1080 is for garbage low quality games.