Review Alienware AW2521H 360Hz Monitor Review: Motion Blur Be Gone

[Admin]

Alienware’s AW2521H is one of the fastest monitors we’ve ever tested. It runs at 360 Hz and delivers G-Sync with HDR. If you’re looking for ultimate gaming performance, it might be at the pinnacle.

Alienware AW2521H 360Hz Monitor Review: Motion Blur Be Gone : Read more

 

[barryv88]

Stopped readying when I saw it was only HD.
HD is waaaaay past is selling date. Who still wants to buy a monitor in this day and STILL be stuck for HD for many years to come?
This is also in conflict with Tom's recommending the world sweet spot res which is QHD. Move on already people.

 

[TimmyP777]

Uh yeah. People use 1080p for high refresh rates. Noobs know this.

 

[BX4096]

High refresh rates is the most overhyped gimmick feature I've seen in all my life spent in computing. A 1080p 25-incher for $800? My god, some people are dumb...

 

[teknic111]

Can the human eye see such things?

 

[gaborbarla]

High

High refresh rates is the most overhyped gimmick feature I've seen in all my life spent in computing. A 1080p 25-incher for $800? My god, some people are dumb...

Why would high refresh rates be a gimmick? I am a gamer with some competitive gaming background and I can tell you that high refresh rate makes a huge difference both in smoothness of scrolling and actual ease of aiming on FPS games. The usefulness diminishes as we go over 144Hz, but a blur remains, which this monitor supposedly reduces as much as possible. On https://www.testufo.com/ my 144Hz 1440p monitor shows a clear and very visible advantage over 60Hz. With regards to the 1080p, I agree that it is not for me either, but some of the best gamers in the world still use 1080p higher refresh monitors with 240Hz+ and the reason for this is because they can play better with them than a higher res lower refresh monitor, as simple as that. 1080p provides manufacturers a lower amount of pixels to be processed so they can push the price down to acceptable levels. That same monitor probably would not be possible on 1440p or would get crazy expensive as they have to string together processors to pump so many pixels out.

 

[gaborbarla]

Can the human eye see such things?

Over 144Hz it becomes more a feeling than seeing. Also I think this monitor is more than just Hz as reducing blur is just as much about pixel response as high Hz. You get very some bad 144Hz monitors compared to very good ones.

 

[eklipz330]

if you have to ask who this is for, it's not for you.

just how professional athletes are capable of super human feats, their footwear and attire matters just so they can shave off milliseconds.

the same applies to professional gamers. they are extremely good at what they do, and one shouldn't confuse someone who is good at games that plays on their down time versus those who do it professionally for a living. their entire day revolves around sharpening their skills, just like an athlete. so the mouse they use, the keyboard they use, the monitor all matters. resolution isn't as important to them, and there is an optimal screen size so their eyes move less. all professional gamers turn down all graphics and effects to maximize framerate and minimize any on screen distraction. this isn't for immersion. it's for a practical use to shave off milliseconds.

again, not for you.

 

[s997863]

The reduction in motion blur is visible, and the response is addictive. You won’t care that the resolution is FHD

This sounds like my reason for still using a CRT to play old games on my i7 PC at 800x600 or 640x480, except those are running only at 60Hz or 85Hz at most. Can somebody please compare this monitor to CRTs for blurring / ghosting in full-screen scrolling?

 

[Endymio]

High refresh rates is the most overhyped gimmick feature I've seen in all my life spent in computing. A 1080p 25-incher for $800? My god, some people are dumb...

I'd love to see a double-blind study on high-refresh monitors. I'd bet a sizeable sum that 90%+ of people can't distinguish anything above 120hz.

I'd also like to point out for the math-challenged here that a monitor with a 3ms response time can't quite hit 360 hz. So there's either some rounding or fudging going on.

 

[fevanson]

I have a Viewsonic 144hz VA panel, and I bought it for the great contrast ratio, as dealing with HDR is a hit or miss on Windows 10. Although there is slight blur due to it being a "cheaper" panel, the black detail is amazing for not even having hdr. I guess the 80,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio really works well on this monitor.

 

[Endymio]

the black detail is amazing for not even having hdr. I guess the 80,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio really works well on this monitor.

An 80M:1 contrast ratio IS high dynamic range. There is some standards-based additions for transmitting and decoding HDR signals -- but that doesn't affect black levels. Zero is zero, in any standard.

 

[NP]

I'd love to see a double-blind study on high-refresh monitors. I'd bet a sizeable sum that 90%+ of people can't distinguish anything above 120hz.

I'd also like to point out for the math-challenged here that a monitor with a 3ms response time can't quite hit 360 hz. So there's either some rounding or fudging going on.

I'd like to see that double-blind study as well. However, I don't think it would be very interesting if you just took random people walking down the street as participants. Of course they cannot distinguish the difference. The whole point is not to sell this monitor to people who feel they don't need it. Those who feel they don't need it, most certainly do not need it.

Rather, the interesting question is about the people who think they benefit from gaming this monitor vs. something else. If this double-blind study were to be conducted with such people as participants then I think the study would be very interesting and useful.

And much more useful than comments "Not another 1080p, its 2021 now!". There will be 1080p gaming many years into the future. And after those years have passed there will still be people who play on resolutions considerably below 1080p in order to get more frames. At that stage, there might not be enough such people anymore that there would be monitors made and marketed specifically to them. Then again, if you have a fully functional 1080p 360Hz monitor to sell at that point, you will make big aftermarket bucks.

 

[thepersonwithaface45]

Professional gamers can game at 60hz if they had to. The refresh rate on their monitors is not the pinnacle reason why they're good at the game.

I'm with the other guy, let's get more 4k displays at high refresh rates and stop investing in expensive albeit high refresh rate 1080p monitors so they stop making them.
They do be having some nice 32" 4k displays this summer though.

 

[Endymio]

And much more useful than comments "Not another 1080p, its 2021 now!". There will be 1080p gaming many years into the future. And after those years have passed there will still be people who play on resolutions considerably below 1080p in order to get more frames.

Very true. And it's worthwhile to point out that your average Hollywood film at 640p and a lowly 24 fps looks more realistic than a video game at 4K @ 120 fps. The market chases resolution and refresh rate numbers because they're more easily quantifiable than overall picture quality and/or realism. One day gamers might wise up.

I'm with the other guy, let's get more 4k displays at high refresh rates and stop investing in expensive albeit high refresh rate 1080p monitors so they stop making them.

You realize that the ultra-high bandwidth ports and panel control electronics required for high-refresh 1080p monitors are stepping stones to the even-higher-bandwidths required for high-refresh 4K monitors?

 

[thepersonwithaface45]

You realize that the ultra-high bandwidth ports and panel control electronics required for high-refresh 1080p monitors are stepping stones to the even-higher-bandwidths required for high-refresh 4K monitors?

it's 2021 sir, we've been stepped on the dang stones

 

[Endymio]

it's 2021 sir, we've been stepped on the dang stones

If I've properly decrypted your meaning, I respond by noting that a 4K display at a mere 90fps corresponds to 1080p @ 360fps -- the same refresh rate as this Alienware monitor. For anything above 90fps, you need to keep on steppin'.

 

[wirefire]

Can the human eye see such things?

That is a complex question. in theory.... no your eye cannot see such things. That isn't really what the 360Hz is for though. Once you hit a certain point (somewhere between 60-120 Hz for most people) there is nothing more to "see". What you do see is the monitor's inability to get rid of an old image before another is drawn. for these monitors black to white is easy in most cases. but there are other scenarios like blue to red or white to black that are more challenging for the monitor to complete. the LEDs don't just turn off and on because you tell them to. they bleed light. So even at 360 Hz, the LEDs are reconfigured 6 times a second. That doesn't mean that they actually can go from complete black to complete white in 1/6th of a second and because of this, ghosting and blur occur. sure the 360Hz helps. but it isn't the whole story. This is why OLED can excel without a super high refresh rate. the OLED are almost instant on and off. so if you go from black to white it can happen pretty close to the refresh rate of the panel. there is still some leakage but it is far less than a LCD. if you had an OLED at 120Hz and one at 360Hz and the rest of the parts were equal it is unlikely you would see much difference between them. There are people that are sensitive to OLEDs though. there is a pulse to the screen on an OLED and some people can "see" it on lower refresh rates.

it is more about how fast can the produce a perfect frame. clean up after itself and make another perfect frame. in reality this never happens. but the faster the monitor is, the closer you get to this scenario... so even through you can't see it... the high refresh rate will typically look better.

 

[Endymio]

That isn't really what the 360Hz is for though. ...What you do see is the monitor's inability to get rid of an old image before another is drawn....it is more about how fast can the produce a perfect frame. clean up after itself and make another perfect frame

You're conflating two different characteristics that are entirely independent. Response time is the factor affecting ghosting and blurring -- a monitor with a 1ms response time won't see visible ghosting even with a refresh rate of a few frames per second or less. Refresh rate, however, affects how much a scene changes between frames; a low refresh rate will cause movement in a scene to appear jerky and/or choppy, no matter how good your response time is.

These two factors can interact in a complex and, in some cases, unexpected manner. For example, there are cases (viz. very slow refresh rates) in which a worse response time can actually improve perceived image quality ... but in general, they affect different facets of the image, and shouldn't be confused with each other.

 

[kristoffe]

if you have to ask who this is for, it's not for you.

just how professional athletes are capable of super human feats, their footwear and attire matters just so they can shave off milliseconds.

the same applies to professional gamers. they are extremely good at what they do, and one shouldn't confuse someone who is good at games that plays on their down time versus those who do it professionally for a living. their entire day revolves around sharpening their skills, just like an athlete. so the mouse they use, the keyboard they use, the monitor all matters. resolution isn't as important to them, and there is an optimal screen size so their eyes move less. all professional gamers turn down all graphics and effects to maximize framerate and minimize any on screen distraction. this isn't for immersion. it's for a practical use to shave off milliseconds.

again, not for you.

lol professional gamers can not sense 360hz. calm down, edge-lord.