Acer's Predator X34 Monitor Hits The Market With Curved Display, Ultra-Wide QHD, G-Sync

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
144hz is not currently possible for a screen that large and at 1440p resolution. No current panel can achieve that, nor does the currently implemented DP standard either on hardware or the current generation of NVIDIA GPUs.

Regardless, 100Mhz is a very noticeable improvement above 60Hz. The difference between 100Hz and 144Hz is less noticeable.

And while $1300.00 is salty - the original ASUS ROG Swift was also crazy expensive at launch- and was constantly sold out! I'd expect ASUS's version of this monitor (released around December) to be the same.

Either way I was lucky enough to score one of the few X34s from Newegg and come Thursday (assuming there are no RMA issues) I'll be staring at a 34" curved screed of 1440p GSync goodness.
 
The $250 premium for gsync vs freesync makes me want to switch to the red team.

Pascal better blow my mind in DX12 or nVidia is losing a customer.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the point of G-Sync and FreeSync that you don't need insanely fast refresh rates for smooth gameplay? Seems that reaching the 75 - 100 Hz range should be plenty.

In a related note, I just ordered my own 21:9 screen. Not nearly as nice as this one ( one day I'd like to try a 34" 1440p curved display ), but I'm hoping I'll enjoy it.
 
The $250 premium for gsync vs freesync makes me want to switch to the red team.

Pascal better blow my mind in DX12 or nVidia is losing a customer.
Click to expand...
it's upsetting that nvidia is nearly ready to release their next generation probably early next year... amd just released their response to the 900 series. amd is seriously behind.
 

Yes your wrong. 😀

The purpose of adaptive sync overall is to make gameplay smooth only when the frame rate isn't optimal. Think of it as a better version of V-Sync (which it is).



 
Nice that these widescreen G-Sync monitors are finally coming out, but knew they would be extremely expensive. I understand having to paying a premium for a faster panel and G-Sync support, but not THAT much of a premium -- it's priced $300-400 too high, IMO. I'd like to have a FreeSync/G-Sync monitor, but when I just got my Dell U3415W for about half the cost of the Predator X34, the price premium it's currently isn't fully justifiable. That said, if you got the extra scratch lying around to blow on this, then by all means...
 


There is always a premium to new tech. I would suspect as more of these types of panels/monitors come online that there will be a price drop though I'd suspect that it will not be as drastic as most would like - and not for a long time.

If the market couldn't support the premium then the price would have dropped; but it hasn't. That's just economics. And the hope that people had that AMD's Freesync would be competitive and cause a price war has not materialized either.

GSync, in my opinion, is just a better implementation of the adaptive sync solution.
 
I can't be the first one to think of this, but as far as I can tell, there's no technological barrier preventing a single monitor from supporting both Gsync and Freesync.

Contractual douchebaggery can be a high hurdle, though.
 
The $250 premium for gsync vs freesync makes me want to switch to the red team.

Pascal better blow my mind in DX12 or nVidia is losing a customer.
Click to expand...
it's upsetting that nvidia is nearly ready to release their next generation probably early next year... amd just released their response to the 900 series. amd is seriously behind.
Click to expand...

Behind in DX11. Seriously ahead in DX12. A 390 is as good as a 980ti in DX12. More cores perform incredibly well according to benchmarks from a lot of different sources. We're stuck waiting until we see how green team optimizes their drivers in the future.
 
Don't beat me up guys on this post, as the X34 does have me very interested, but... Minus the G-SYNC, I wonder how the X34 performs when compared to the BenQ XR3501 when DSR is applied to 1440p rez w/V-Sync on.

Not to mention several hundred dollars price difference. Thoughts?
 
The $250 premium for gsync vs freesync makes me want to switch to the red team.

Pascal better blow my mind in DX12 or nVidia is losing a customer.
Click to expand...
it's upsetting that nvidia is nearly ready to release their next generation probably early next year... amd just released their response to the 900 series. amd is seriously behind.
Click to expand...

Behind in DX11. Seriously ahead in DX12. A 390 is as good as a 980ti in DX12. More cores perform incredibly well according to benchmarks from a lot of different sources. We're stuck waiting until we see how green team optimizes their drivers in the future.
Click to expand...
A 390 is as good as a Fury X, 980 (non Ti) and 980ti in a broken DX12 test, Can we move on and leave Ashes of Singularity rest in peace? It has proved one thing that the coders messed up and ruined the DX12 image.
 
The $250 premium for gsync vs freesync makes me want to switch to the red team.

Pascal better blow my mind in DX12 or nVidia is losing a customer.
Click to expand...
it's upsetting that nvidia is nearly ready to release their next generation probably early next year... amd just released their response to the 900 series. amd is seriously behind.
Click to expand...

Behind in DX11. Seriously ahead in DX12. A 390 is as good as a 980ti in DX12. More cores perform incredibly well according to benchmarks from a lot of different sources. We're stuck waiting until we see how green team optimizes their drivers in the future.
Click to expand...
A 390 is as good as a Fury X, 980 (non Ti) and 980ti in a broken DX12 test, Can we move on and leave Ashes of Singularity rest in peace? It has proven one thing that the coders messed up and ruined the DX12 image.
 
I've got the Dell 34" ultrawide. Mine o/c to 75hz, haven't tried higher. The 1440 ultrawide is quite nice. In fact, it's great. If I hadn't bought the Dell for 699, I'd add the Acer to my wishlist.
 
I don't understand the reason for putting speakers on a monitor.. it adds to the cost, even if only a little, and the majority of gamers will already have a headset or speaker setup.
 
I don't understand the reason for putting speakers on a monitor.. it adds to the cost, even if only a little, and the majority of gamers will already have a headset or speaker setup.
 
I don't understand the reason for putting speakers on a monitor.. it adds to the cost, even if only a little, and the majority of gamers will already have a headset or speaker setup.
 

"You're" mistaken. 😉

I'm aware of what adaptive syncing is intended to do. The purpose ( or at least a major benefit ) of high-refresh displays is to reduce input lag. Since a 120 Hz or 144 Hz display has a much shorter time between refreshes than a typical 60 Hz display, they display a changed frame quicker, thus you see feedback sooner and you can potentially react sooner. Another advantage is traditional V-sync can be used with less fuss since the shorter wait between frames means that you have less stutter if a frame is rendered just after the refresh cycle.

Adaptive syncing fixes the tearing and stuttering problems associated with V-sync, so the only question then is about input lag. Since you're displaying the frames almost as soon as they're available, you do cut the lag a little bit, though not necessarily as much as on a 144 Hz display. However, NVidia has said the effectiveness of G-Sync is best in the 30 - 75 fps range.

I'm not saying you can't have a 120+ Hz adaptive sync display, I'm saying that NVidia and AMD have already said that adaptive sync has the biggest impact at more normal refresh rates.
 


No can do..... need Display Port 1.3 to provide the necessary bandwidth,




That takes the apples and apples comparison to apples and watermelons.

G-Sync comes with ULMB technology, that's the "hardware part" of G-Sync; Freesync does not.

With G-Sync, you get G-Sync to handle issues at 60 fps and below (works well up to 75 fps) and you get Ulrta Low Motion Blur Technology as part of the package. If you are getting 70 fps and up in a game, it is recommended that you turn off G-Sync and use ULMB. Freesync doesn't come with any Motion Blur Reduction Technology, so **if** a Freesync monitor comes with it, is is a package provided by the manufacturer.... at a cost .... with each manufacturer deciding just how much they want to spend on it, if they provide it at all. That makes picking a Freesync monitor a bit more of an effort as one has to investigate:

1) Does it have any MBR technology ?
2) If it does how good is it ?

OTOH, if your card(s) can't do > 60 fps, then you have the option of saving money and buying one w/o MBR componentry.
 

I agree with you on this particular model since it's meant to be a gaming display. What gamer is going to spend $1000+ on a monitor ( not to mention the money spent on GPU(s) to power 3440x1440 gaming ) yet they don't have a headset?

I have no problem with speakers in monitors in general, however. While monitor speakers are hardly ever high quality, they're good enough for most basic uses and keep fewer things on a desk. Home users, business offices, even professional imaging monitors can benefit from them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom