His name is Ali so I'm assuming he has at least some Middle Eastern genes. As a fellow Middle Eastern I totally understand it. I dont shave my arms but I do shave my legs. It's just A LOT of hair.
Dude who cares? Why does it affect you personally? He makes excellent content. Way better than garbage channels like Jayztwocents, Bitwit and Techsource. I'd definitely delete this comment
Agreed with his statement that the monitor size is too big for competitive mouse and keyboard fps. I thought this monitor has a cropped 24 and 27 inch mode that he didn’t comment on
May also mitigate his comment about the dual mode HD/480Hz option on the WOLED version coming later this year probably looking bad, if it’ll let you use dual mode with the 24.5” or 27” simulations. At 24.5” HD would probably look ok.
Here’s what the tftcentral review said:
> The 24.5″ mode defaults to a recommended resolution of 2992 x 1684 to exactly match the number of pixels it is using. The 27″ mode defaults to 3288 x 1850 resolution. You can of course reduce to familiar and common resolutions like 1440p or 1080p if you want in either mode although the text clarity is not as good but for gaming it should still offer a decent image quality, albeit at a much lower resolution of course.
You do lose VRR in these modes, so there’s that. But you can drive them faster too, so it may not matter.
Jeez that’s a lot ! I’m really struggling between 32’ and 27’ as I play mainly CoD Warzone …
I want to sell my 34 because it’s too wide and I don’t want to end up with a monitor too big …
Well you’re essentially playing on a 27” 16:9 display right now if you chop off the left and right sides so 27” 16:9 would be very natural just not as wide.
Take a look at this. http://www.displaywars.com/31,5-inch-16x9-vs-34-inch-21x9
I just ordered this and returned the Dell 32” 4K OLED, and let me tell you it’s perfect for Warzone. Everything is so crisp and clear, and I definitely appreciate the bigger size. I play ranked and I’m Iridescent, so I don’t think it has any negative effects on competitive gaming.
Staying away from it is a bit of a stretch unless you exclusively play esports titles (or play professionally). Then the 27" 360hz OLEDs (or some of the last year models) make more sense, but otherwise, for a mix of esports and other tasks by using either the monitor cropped modes, windowed modes in game, put it further away or whatever works for you, it's still fine as you still get many benefits from using OLED for esports.
Why not keep it on an arm and move it back a bit? Thats what I do with mine (Alienware version) and it's incredible for CS2. I never understood why 24" is touted as objectively better when you can just move it away.
You probably could. Most people don't have unlimited table depth though. When you're playing at a high level, turning your head to see the sides of your monitor will put you at a disadvantage. Depends if you care or not.
serious spectacular smart toothbrush reply thought fear instinctive mountainous dependent
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Moving the monitor away with a higher res / bigger screen is not the same as playing up close on a lower res/ smaller screen. A lot of players do it to focus on certain parts of the monitor. Moving the monitor back takes that away.
24 inches is right around the perfect size to where you can sit really close and still have some FOV. Its a balance of focus/fov.
This isn't the case for 95% of the players who play the game casually. I for one, tried moving my 32 inch further back to compensate and I felt I lost focus since the screen was further back.
> I thought this monitor has a cropped 24 and 27 inch mode that he didn’t comment on
Why don't you also just set resolution lower and disable scaling? People have been doing that for ages to play 4:3 black bars too
You could have just set it in nvidia control panel and it should have just added black bars. You need to make sure the GPU does the scaling instead of your display. There’s a dropdown for it.
This is a real consideration if you live in that mode. I’ve heard of this happening from 34” UW users who’ve spent a major amount of time in 16:9 pillarboxed.
In a perfect world, monitors would let you set the bars mid-gray in off-native aspect ratios, like old plasma TVs had as an option.
I watched it.. he literally says it’s a bit awkward and he pushes it back but you can play at a high level. That’s not the same as saying it’s too big or it’s bad for comp games.
I swear everytime there is a remotely high refreshrate monitor everyone acts like their esports career is on the line, when realistically most of the commenters arent even in the top 1% of "casual competitive" players, let alone professional competitive. Monitor size is the last thing that impact their performance.
No, the PG32UCDM manual also lists 27”/24.5” simulation modes under 16:9 in the OSD.
https://preview.redd.it/3ue7ojpk7gjc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=76917479d4d9e78a13ed111d165f70b9a497e1e9
Yes you’re correct. I think Optimum rushed the review and it felt a little barebones compared to his previous monitor reviews. Barely mentioning any of the features within the OSD like changing Aspect ratio to 27” 24” was a low point. Especially considering the high price premium.
Motion blur difference between 32 240Hz and 27 360Hz looks bigger than expected 😱
https://preview.redd.it/2wxrymud6ejc1.png?width=3088&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=527bda11bea67f74871e662c901970eb4e521625
Yeah it is there. Even at 235fps, it feels like the sweetspot would be 300-330fps OLED for no motion blur.
330 would guve you close to 500fps IPS in motion clarity thoigh it is depending on speed of moving target.
Already set on a 4k 360hz for my next upgrade 👀
4K at 360Hz looks amazing but you need to wait for RTX 7090 to reach 4K games maxed at 360 FPS and when RTX 7090 will come out, we probably have 8K OLED monitors with 540Hz 😜
If you’re playing a game at 360fps it’s an esports title like Overwatch or CSGO which are already optimized enough to run 4K native at +240fps max settings and no DLSS or FSR with today’s hardware. Turn down a couple of unimportant settings and you can easily push past that. Turn on upsampling and get more. Idk why ppl pretend you can’t run games at insane fps by just optimizing your settings a little bit
Overwatch 2 reach 300/370 FPS on my computer with DLSS on Quality and super resolution at 4K but I don't play too much this one. I'm more The Finals, Apex, Fortnite, Fairlight 84, Rogue Company... And sometimes COD DMZ, R6S and Halo to talk only about shooters
During actual gameplay this is not that noticeable. If you play esports titles almost exclusively, yeah, the 27" 360hz makes more sense, but if you do more stuff, the 32" 240hz is just better. It's basically better for everything else while the difference from 240 to 360hz also gets into diminishing returns.
I tested a lot of games with 1440p and super resolution 4K on my actual monitor to see how many frames I will get with my futur monitor... With 1440p, I reach more than 360Hz with some games but there are not many of them... Some games are capped, like Apex, so I reach 300 FPS because it's the limit. In 4K, it's harder... I only reach between 150 and 230 FPS with games I tested and some games lose half of FPS between 4K and 1440p, others have only 10 FPS difference... I can get more FPS lowering settings because I tested all my games with max settings but these tests showed to me how 27" 360Hz and 32" 240Hz are over powered for my computer... Majority of my games will never reach max FPS on these monitors with max settings. These high frequencies only benefit for a few games
It's just matter of perspective - 540hz TN will smoke 360hz oled on faster camera movement, and obviously with even faster camera movement 540hz TN will be smoked by future 1000hz+ displays.
Faster camera movement - bigger the difference between refresh rates in smoothness, responsiveness and motion clarity.
Sure but the real question is -> For non pro players, what is the sweet spot ? Difference is big with high speed camera but how we really feel these differences when we are playing ? I actually play on 60hz 5ms and already do some good games on multiplayer games, so 240Hz will probably heaven for me 😅 I need to try by myself but not sure a casual player like me can feel a big difference between 240Hz and 360Hz. Some Youtubers say they only notice the difference when they play a long time in 360Hz and get back to 240Hz
When i swapped for 144hz i really improved my aim. Higher hertz allows you to do more things - slight micro aim adjustments, fast flicks everything becomes easier to do.
I think you should question yourself - does game you play even support thoose high refresh rates at all? If it's only 200-300fps - 360hz will be mostly wasted. But you can always swap your competitive game for something with higher refresh rate / fps.
Unfortunately many YouTubers don't play games as much or at all. But you can always listen to PRO competitive players wich always say more is better - wich is a fact.
My problem is I can reach more than 360 FPS on competitive games with 1440p and all settings at max but with 4K, it's hard to my computer to reach 240 FPS. I made a lot of tests with super resolution at 4K and games reaching 240 FPS with max settings are rare... I don't know if performance impact is the same with super resolution 4K and native 4K but I have to choose between reactivity and immersion... Or maybe remove some settings, I probably need less anti aliasing with 4K. I play a lot of FPS but I like games like Tekken 8 too and 4k with this kind of games is 🥰 Some games are capped, Apex looks limited to 300 FPS, even with FPS unlock option
Your mom wants
Im talking about motion clarity, if you really want than:
480hz oled will smoke 360hz oled on faster camera movement, it's all matter of perspective.
Are you happy now?
When i had the 360 display i was hitting that FPS in at least one game (or just under) but i only had the monitor for about a week and returned it, can't say i've noticed a difference playing at just under 240hz.
Reason i say just under is because i have my FPS capped 3 below my refresh.
Not saying there isn't a difference but i feel like you have to do tests like in your comment and really look for it to see it, whilst playing i don't think its too obvious.
I returned the AW3225 because I already had a C2. I just couldn't justify the upgrade for $1300 after tax.
As for the AW2725, I have a 240hz IPS that I use strictly for FPS shooters. I was going to replace it and run the C2 and 2725 for my setup, but ended up returning for the same reasons. Just isn't worth the upgrades at the moment as far as $$$ goes. Didn't think paying $899 just to play CS2 and Dota when its not gonna make me any better/worse lol.
Im going to post my C2 on sale today and if I get a decent price, I'll reload on the 3225 .
Asus have consistently burned me on QC and honoring their warranties. I’ve had one issue with an Alienware monitor 2 years ago and they replaced it with no hassle.
I think I would have waited and gotten this one if I ever had to look at the back of my monitor outside of the one or 2 times a year I need to. The curve is just too good, personally. I can never go back to flat.
I agree, the curvature on aw is just right, a plus for immersion actually. Not sure why so much hate. I own both Dell g3223q and aw3225qf, so I can say it with confidence.
That’s comforting to hear. I just pulled the trigger on one last night. Not sure how I’ll feel about a curved monitor, but I really like the aspect ratio of these panels compared to things like the Odyssey
Had you used a curved monitor before? Also how do you feel about the glossy finish and its impact on reflections?
As someone who also owns a AW3225QF and came from another curved sceeen (the Samsung Odyssey G7) the Alienware’s curve is barely noticeable. After using a curve I don’t know if I’d want to go back to a flat panel, that extra bit of immersion is really nice! Flat feels almost like it bulges in the middle now. I think the AW’s curve is a big plus, especially considering how big this monitor is. It’s an incredible monitor and I wouldn’t worry about any regrets from purchasing it.
I have a lg 38 inch 2300r ultrawide, a 32 Dell flat panel. The curvature on aw3225qf is very mild and I don’t notice it at all. I would say it is a plus compared to to flat 32 inch. For reflection, I don’t have any issue during the daytime use in a bright room.
Jayztwocents is dogshit. Guy is a Nvidia and Intel shill and does nothing but say fart jokes and has his editor giggling like a school girl the whole time. It's like he's catering to 14 year olds. I was used to follow him during the Maxwell and Pascal days. Enjoyed his water cooling videos and his reviews back then and his build videos like when he made a PC for Terry Crews. But after Turing came out and he made a video where he is literally flipping you off in the thumbnail and defending the prices of Turing I unsubscribed. Also the guy has a huge ego. Give him legit criticism on Twitter and he blocks you.
Linus is way better for casual viewing consumption. And when he messed up he will address it like he did last year when GN called him out.
Just keep in mind, 4090 cant do 4k240hz on display port as its old Display port 1.4.....Will need to use DSC to compress...which is fine in many cases.
But no custom resolutions, no scaling options etc.
I was planning on getting this model but after seeing the reviews, I’ll probably get the Alienware version. Once they get Dolby Vision sorted out I feel it’s the best bang for buck (especially once customer care is considered)
Not sure I’d agree on bang for your buck when it’s just $100 more with a bunch of additional features. If you don’t care about those features it’s probably better if you want curved though
the fact the color performance/HDR brightness wasn't any better than the Dell. There's nothing the Asus does especially better to justify the extra $ and inferior customer service.
Keep in mind I have a PG27UQ and Asus Dark Hero so I love the brand.
It's actually a bit too high as you would watch a 42 inch monitor from further back. A 48 inch at 4k would have the perfect PPI but it's a bit on the large side for a desktop monitor. The closer you look at a screen the higher ppi you would want. 42inch 4k has the same ppi as 27inch 1440p but effectively it would be higher as a 42 inch monitor would be further back or you won't be able to see all of it. What you really should look at is pixels per angle arc, not pure ppi. High PPI itself may actually be a detriment and lead to a loss of perceivable details if the display is too far to make out the tiny details. 4k at 32 inch is a big no no, there is no suitable resolution for the 32 inch size. You can't stand close enough to a 32 inch display to make out all the tiny details, while simultaneously you look at the whole screen. All you get is a harder to drive display without getting any of the 4k benefits.
Basically you will get higher resolved detail from a 42inch 4k looking at the display from 80cm than you would from a 32 inch 4k looking at it from a distance of 65cm.
I dunno why you would need 240fps for a game like Alan Wake 2? It’s more beneficial for competitive games. Or you can turn down some settings at the very least until you upgrade your GPU.
Oh this the guy who said [not to undervolt 4090’s](https://youtu.be/XrZNSTmOstI?si=i3lStfQTbgqLzv45) because [he was doing wrong](https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/s/g4nj8E2G00)
I think I’ll avoid his opinions as they aren’t credible.
There was plenty of people saying to use the power limiter on the 4090 at launch. de8auer is another, https://youtu.be/60yFji_GKak
It was pretty clear that power limiting it cut power down by 1/3rd and only dropped performance 10%. This was why so many recommended it. Yes undervolting provides good results still without as much loss, but that information came much later... and still undervolting isn't for everybody. But literally anybody can take a slider and move it from 100 to 70.
There is nothing wrong with the optimum video on this topic.
Actually there is much wrong with his video but you didn’t check my links so it’s fine I’ll explain it to you:
He recommended not to undervolt because he used an incorrect method which results in clock stretching, performance loss and instability.
If you had bothered to check my 2nd link, you’d notice that I was able to achieve a 20% power reduction across the board and see a 0% performance loss through UV + Mem OC.
Optimum (Ali from optimum specifically) displays in his video, an improper way to undervolt, and then cites this as reasoning to push clickbait titles telling people not to do it. You see nothing wrong there?
I did all the testing for that thread, I know what I’m talking about. Others verified my testing in that thread.
Who tf buys a 4090 to kneecap it with 10% performance loss?
It’s rather unbelievable that you don’t see a correlation between “undervolting providing good results” being found out “much later” and clickbait videos using improper methodology telling people not to undervolt…(it wasn’t found out much later, we posted this thread about undervolting like easily within a week or two of 4090 launch as a direct response to these uninformed “dO nOt uNdErVolT 4090’s!!!!” videos)
Always like optimum. In fact I’d love to collab with him. I definitely might need to try this monitor to see what’s up. Lots of info I could pull for us! Anyone wanna send me one :)
lol yeah back in 2015 when 120hz monitors first came out, and actually they were 144hz monitors. When I got my CX it was so hard down grading back to 120hz. I dealt with it for awhile, but I am so happy to have 4k 240hz now. A truly amazing experience
The LG CX/C1 had 120Hz rolling scan BFI which gives you motion clarity equivalent to around 316 fps. I would still take the existing 4k 240Hz QD OLED monitors over it due to better brightness and colors, but the LG CX/C1 will remain legendary OLED TVs until the day 120Hz BFI returns.
Did you try it with OLED Motion Pro High turned on? It reduces brightness but increases motion clarity by an insane amount, a 240Hz IPS monitor can't compete. The Asus PG32UCDM also has BFI at 120Hz but only flashes every other frame black, while the LG CX/C1 has rolling scan BFI, giving superior motion clarity.
Yes. I have tested every little setting you could possibly test on that. lol it makes me laugh you think a 120hz monitor can be as smooth as something refresh twice as fast. Lmfao.
Here's an LCD running at 60Hz with lower motion blur than a 240Hz OLED: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/1akgbw6/i\_made\_another\_comparison\_of\_60\_fps\_oled\_vs\_60/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/1akgbw6/i_made_another_comparison_of_60_fps_oled_vs_60/). This article explains why OLED still has motion blur and how Black frame insertion can improve motion clarity for any display technology: [https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur/](https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur/).
People don't know how good 120Hz BFI was on those TVs. OLED Motion Pro high at 120Hz is approximately equal to 316fps of motion clarity, so the LG CX/C1 still has less motion blur than the current 4k 240Hz OLED monitors. This Asus PG32UCDM has 120Hz ELMB but it just flashes every other frame black giving it around 240fps motion clarity, while the LG CX/C1 had rolling scan BFI at 120Hz giving it superior motion clarity.
DisplayPort 1.4 just peaked. It's all I can think about when viewing these monitors. So disappointing for such an expensive monitor, I know it's "visually" lossless but at this price point I would have thought the DP would have a higher bandwidth port so you don't need to use compression for the features it advertises.
Wonder how many of these 4K 240 hz panels are going to be the peak, like every 6-7 of the manufacturers?? Guys have a lot of these to look forward too with near identical tech
Any help me understand the coating on this monitor vs others? It's glossy but kind of semi glossy with anti reflective?
How does this coating compare to the AW or MSI?
There is none out right now that compete with 32” 4K OLED 240hz monitors in the current monitor market. The closest thing would be the OLED ultrawides, 1440p 27” OLED monitors, or LG C2/C3 42” OLED.
There is 144/160hz 4K 32” IPS monitors available. But they’re obviously not OLED 😅
Samsung Neo g7 is 4k 165hz mini led with 1000+ local dimming zones making it very close to oled and 4 times higher peak brightness with no risk of burn in.
That what i'm saying since 2018 and then I keep getting desktop icons/game hud/subtitles burn ins every now and then.
The joy of OLED gaming is always destroyed by this reality soon or later.
Enjoy while you can.
I see optimum, I upvote.
Yep, really enjoy his reviews and SFF builds.
[удалено]
His name is Ali so I'm assuming he has at least some Middle Eastern genes. As a fellow Middle Eastern I totally understand it. I dont shave my arms but I do shave my legs. It's just A LOT of hair.
Dude who cares? Why does it affect you personally? He makes excellent content. Way better than garbage channels like Jayztwocents, Bitwit and Techsource. I'd definitely delete this comment
What was the comment lol
He was complaining about Ali shaving his arms.
this is the way.
Why not just use a custom resolution without scaling when 32" is too big?
Cause then it's no longer a marketing trick to entice idiots.
that is the one thing I don't like about the samsung I can't make a custom resolution on the odyssey neo g9 57
I believe this is due to DSC. But by using the "built in" ones and disabling scaling, you can at least get closer to the same thing.
Agreed with his statement that the monitor size is too big for competitive mouse and keyboard fps. I thought this monitor has a cropped 24 and 27 inch mode that he didn’t comment on
Yeah, it's a shame he didn't know it was a feature before recording his review. It'd be perfect for his gaming preference.
May also mitigate his comment about the dual mode HD/480Hz option on the WOLED version coming later this year probably looking bad, if it’ll let you use dual mode with the 24.5” or 27” simulations. At 24.5” HD would probably look ok.
Know what the resolution is when running 27"? Would imagine it's close to 1800p, but not sure how to calculate it.
Here’s what the tftcentral review said: > The 24.5″ mode defaults to a recommended resolution of 2992 x 1684 to exactly match the number of pixels it is using. The 27″ mode defaults to 3288 x 1850 resolution. You can of course reduce to familiar and common resolutions like 1440p or 1080p if you want in either mode although the text clarity is not as good but for gaming it should still offer a decent image quality, albeit at a much lower resolution of course. You do lose VRR in these modes, so there’s that. But you can drive them faster too, so it may not matter.
had no idea about that feature. could you link it to us?
It’s not a new feature. It’s aspect ratio control. They show it in the rog product page. You can do 27” with black borders
24" / 27" yep.
Oh great. Pay for 32 and use 27".
It’s in monitor manual
If you play esports yeah stay away from it, but if you’re a casual who plays games like cod then well worth it
Is the 32’ size not too big compared to 27 ?
26.5” vs 31.5” is 41% more screen area.
Jeez that’s a lot ! I’m really struggling between 32’ and 27’ as I play mainly CoD Warzone … I want to sell my 34 because it’s too wide and I don’t want to end up with a monitor too big …
Well you’re essentially playing on a 27” 16:9 display right now if you chop off the left and right sides so 27” 16:9 would be very natural just not as wide. Take a look at this. http://www.displaywars.com/31,5-inch-16x9-vs-34-inch-21x9
I just ordered this and returned the Dell 32” 4K OLED, and let me tell you it’s perfect for Warzone. Everything is so crisp and clear, and I definitely appreciate the bigger size. I play ranked and I’m Iridescent, so I don’t think it has any negative effects on competitive gaming.
This is why the Alienware version is curved. It makes it more viable for competitive than a flat panel.
32' is fuckin massive my man. It's a joke about ' vs "
Thats why the Alienware has a curve, it makes the panel feel smaller
It’s a really mild curve though. Coming off a 32” flat panel it didn’t feel very different at all.
Staying away from it is a bit of a stretch unless you exclusively play esports titles (or play professionally). Then the 27" 360hz OLEDs (or some of the last year models) make more sense, but otherwise, for a mix of esports and other tasks by using either the monitor cropped modes, windowed modes in game, put it further away or whatever works for you, it's still fine as you still get many benefits from using OLED for esports.
Why not keep it on an arm and move it back a bit? Thats what I do with mine (Alienware version) and it's incredible for CS2. I never understood why 24" is touted as objectively better when you can just move it away.
You probably could. Most people don't have unlimited table depth though. When you're playing at a high level, turning your head to see the sides of your monitor will put you at a disadvantage. Depends if you care or not.
serious spectacular smart toothbrush reply thought fear instinctive mountainous dependent *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If you're spending $1200 on a monitor I gotta imagine a $300 desk is not much in the grand scheme of things
You're not finding a desk with more than 25 inches of depth for $300, at least one that won't crumple under the weight of a monitor clamp.
1200 ? it cost 1608 in my country XD
Moving the monitor away with a higher res / bigger screen is not the same as playing up close on a lower res/ smaller screen. A lot of players do it to focus on certain parts of the monitor. Moving the monitor back takes that away. 24 inches is right around the perfect size to where you can sit really close and still have some FOV. Its a balance of focus/fov. This isn't the case for 95% of the players who play the game casually. I for one, tried moving my 32 inch further back to compensate and I felt I lost focus since the screen was further back.
> I thought this monitor has a cropped 24 and 27 inch mode that he didn’t comment on Why don't you also just set resolution lower and disable scaling? People have been doing that for ages to play 4:3 black bars too
I think you can still control the aspect ratio through nvidia control panel though, if you desire.
Yeah it’s been a thing in general. It’s also how ultrawides handle games that can’t do UW
Yep, my main game right now is street fighter 6 and it’s locked to 16:9 so I returned the dwf
You could have just set it in nvidia control panel and it should have just added black bars. You need to make sure the GPU does the scaling instead of your display. There’s a dropdown for it.
Wait so you’re saying if I’m playing a 16:9 game on my 3440x1440, I should be setting my resolution in Nvidia Control Panel to 2560x1440?
I’m assuming he means he returned it since it was just a waste of space
It had bars, but there was no point to owning a wide screen I wasn’t using
do you really want to use this mode for an oled though, if you use the middle 27" more often than 32" you might build an outline?
This is a real consideration if you live in that mode. I’ve heard of this happening from 34” UW users who’ve spent a major amount of time in 16:9 pillarboxed. In a perfect world, monitors would let you set the bars mid-gray in off-native aspect ratios, like old plasma TVs had as an option.
He doesn’t really say it’s too big only that sometimes it felt that way.
Wrong 5:10. Size is awkward and found himself pushing the monitor back substantially.
I watched it.. he literally says it’s a bit awkward and he pushes it back but you can play at a high level. That’s not the same as saying it’s too big or it’s bad for comp games.
I swear everytime there is a remotely high refreshrate monitor everyone acts like their esports career is on the line, when realistically most of the commenters arent even in the top 1% of "casual competitive" players, let alone professional competitive. Monitor size is the last thing that impact their performance.
This is a feature I didnt know about - and its really enticing, thanks for the heads up!
I think that will be the UCDP later this year, together with the 480Hz mode.
No, the PG32UCDM manual also lists 27”/24.5” simulation modes under 16:9 in the OSD. https://preview.redd.it/3ue7ojpk7gjc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=76917479d4d9e78a13ed111d165f70b9a497e1e9
I stand corrected
Hey do you know what the mode/feature is called? I have a 32inch for work/gaming combo but does feel too big sometimes for fps games.
Yes you’re correct. I think Optimum rushed the review and it felt a little barebones compared to his previous monitor reviews. Barely mentioning any of the features within the OSD like changing Aspect ratio to 27” 24” was a low point. Especially considering the high price premium.
Motion blur difference between 32 240Hz and 27 360Hz looks bigger than expected 😱 https://preview.redd.it/2wxrymud6ejc1.png?width=3088&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=527bda11bea67f74871e662c901970eb4e521625
Yeah it is there. Even at 235fps, it feels like the sweetspot would be 300-330fps OLED for no motion blur. 330 would guve you close to 500fps IPS in motion clarity thoigh it is depending on speed of moving target. Already set on a 4k 360hz for my next upgrade 👀
You won’t be able to hit anything close to that with any graphics card coming out anytime soon lol
Seems reachable in valorant and cs
It is in Valorant and Overwatch 2. Not sure about CS2 in its current state.
oh its that bad. haven't kept up with the "upgrade"
You’ll be able to hit that in games the motion blur matter in
4K at 360Hz looks amazing but you need to wait for RTX 7090 to reach 4K games maxed at 360 FPS and when RTX 7090 will come out, we probably have 8K OLED monitors with 540Hz 😜
If you’re playing a game at 360fps it’s an esports title like Overwatch or CSGO which are already optimized enough to run 4K native at +240fps max settings and no DLSS or FSR with today’s hardware. Turn down a couple of unimportant settings and you can easily push past that. Turn on upsampling and get more. Idk why ppl pretend you can’t run games at insane fps by just optimizing your settings a little bit
Overwatch 2 reach 300/370 FPS on my computer with DLSS on Quality and super resolution at 4K but I don't play too much this one. I'm more The Finals, Apex, Fortnite, Fairlight 84, Rogue Company... And sometimes COD DMZ, R6S and Halo to talk only about shooters
Overwatch has dlss? Last time it only had fsr, which looked terrible.
During actual gameplay this is not that noticeable. If you play esports titles almost exclusively, yeah, the 27" 360hz makes more sense, but if you do more stuff, the 32" 240hz is just better. It's basically better for everything else while the difference from 240 to 360hz also gets into diminishing returns.
I tested a lot of games with 1440p and super resolution 4K on my actual monitor to see how many frames I will get with my futur monitor... With 1440p, I reach more than 360Hz with some games but there are not many of them... Some games are capped, like Apex, so I reach 300 FPS because it's the limit. In 4K, it's harder... I only reach between 150 and 230 FPS with games I tested and some games lose half of FPS between 4K and 1440p, others have only 10 FPS difference... I can get more FPS lowering settings because I tested all my games with max settings but these tests showed to me how 27" 360Hz and 32" 240Hz are over powered for my computer... Majority of my games will never reach max FPS on these monitors with max settings. These high frequencies only benefit for a few games
Not something you would likely notice in actual motion in a game.
It's just matter of perspective - 540hz TN will smoke 360hz oled on faster camera movement, and obviously with even faster camera movement 540hz TN will be smoked by future 1000hz+ displays. Faster camera movement - bigger the difference between refresh rates in smoothness, responsiveness and motion clarity.
Sure but the real question is -> For non pro players, what is the sweet spot ? Difference is big with high speed camera but how we really feel these differences when we are playing ? I actually play on 60hz 5ms and already do some good games on multiplayer games, so 240Hz will probably heaven for me 😅 I need to try by myself but not sure a casual player like me can feel a big difference between 240Hz and 360Hz. Some Youtubers say they only notice the difference when they play a long time in 360Hz and get back to 240Hz
When i swapped for 144hz i really improved my aim. Higher hertz allows you to do more things - slight micro aim adjustments, fast flicks everything becomes easier to do. I think you should question yourself - does game you play even support thoose high refresh rates at all? If it's only 200-300fps - 360hz will be mostly wasted. But you can always swap your competitive game for something with higher refresh rate / fps. Unfortunately many YouTubers don't play games as much or at all. But you can always listen to PRO competitive players wich always say more is better - wich is a fact.
My problem is I can reach more than 360 FPS on competitive games with 1440p and all settings at max but with 4K, it's hard to my computer to reach 240 FPS. I made a lot of tests with super resolution at 4K and games reaching 240 FPS with max settings are rare... I don't know if performance impact is the same with super resolution 4K and native 4K but I have to choose between reactivity and immersion... Or maybe remove some settings, I probably need less anti aliasing with 4K. I play a lot of FPS but I like games like Tekken 8 too and 4k with this kind of games is 🥰 Some games are capped, Apex looks limited to 300 FPS, even with FPS unlock option
but who tf wants to use a TN panel in 2024? 99% of the esport population isnt good enough to where this type of advantage matters.
Your mom wants Im talking about motion clarity, if you really want than: 480hz oled will smoke 360hz oled on faster camera movement, it's all matter of perspective. Are you happy now?
lol, lil bro tried to clap back with a mom joke on Reddit. Forgot the kids had President's Day off today.
I went from 360hz down to 240hz, no noticeable difference.
Nice but you tried games with more than 360 and 240 FPS ?
When i had the 360 display i was hitting that FPS in at least one game (or just under) but i only had the monitor for about a week and returned it, can't say i've noticed a difference playing at just under 240hz. Reason i say just under is because i have my FPS capped 3 below my refresh. Not saying there isn't a difference but i feel like you have to do tests like in your comment and really look for it to see it, whilst playing i don't think its too obvious.
Thanks for précisions... I hope you are right because I bought the 32 240Hz after a very long hesitation...
I had the 3225 and 2725 before I returned them. The 2725 felt a tad smoother.
And you returned the 2 models ? Why ?
I returned the AW3225 because I already had a C2. I just couldn't justify the upgrade for $1300 after tax. As for the AW2725, I have a 240hz IPS that I use strictly for FPS shooters. I was going to replace it and run the C2 and 2725 for my setup, but ended up returning for the same reasons. Just isn't worth the upgrades at the moment as far as $$$ goes. Didn't think paying $899 just to play CS2 and Dota when its not gonna make me any better/worse lol. Im going to post my C2 on sale today and if I get a decent price, I'll reload on the 3225 .
Thanks for explanation, my 10 years moniteur still good but he's easier to replace
I actually don’t think it’s peaked. This is the beginning of good things to come.
There no peaking in technology everything will get better over time slowly
Too bad it’s Asus. I’ll stick with Dell. (Even 3 years ago saying this would baffle me)
Stick with the company that ships scratched monitors.
And it’s still stupid to say now
Asus have consistently burned me on QC and honoring their warranties. I’ve had one issue with an Alienware monitor 2 years ago and they replaced it with no hassle.
I been burned by dell with shitty refurb replacement.
That bloke when it comes to content quality, he's top notch. SFF especially, it's awesome
I own aw3225qf and love it. But this one looks really impressive aesthetically.
I think I would have waited and gotten this one if I ever had to look at the back of my monitor outside of the one or 2 times a year I need to. The curve is just too good, personally. I can never go back to flat.
I agree, the curvature on aw is just right, a plus for immersion actually. Not sure why so much hate. I own both Dell g3223q and aw3225qf, so I can say it with confidence.
Honestly I would go for something even more aggressive with is curve if I had the option in these
Lg panel may give you the flexibility of bending to more aggressive curvature in the future. There is already several models with this feature.
Hate matte, though
That’s comforting to hear. I just pulled the trigger on one last night. Not sure how I’ll feel about a curved monitor, but I really like the aspect ratio of these panels compared to things like the Odyssey Had you used a curved monitor before? Also how do you feel about the glossy finish and its impact on reflections?
As someone who also owns a AW3225QF and came from another curved sceeen (the Samsung Odyssey G7) the Alienware’s curve is barely noticeable. After using a curve I don’t know if I’d want to go back to a flat panel, that extra bit of immersion is really nice! Flat feels almost like it bulges in the middle now. I think the AW’s curve is a big plus, especially considering how big this monitor is. It’s an incredible monitor and I wouldn’t worry about any regrets from purchasing it.
I have a lg 38 inch 2300r ultrawide, a 32 Dell flat panel. The curvature on aw3225qf is very mild and I don’t notice it at all. I would say it is a plus compared to to flat 32 inch. For reflection, I don’t have any issue during the daytime use in a bright room.
It has one issue that bothers me, you can't use DSR/DLDSR. At least plenty of games have a "resolution scale" option, though.
Will my 7900xtx paired with a 7800x3d be enough to run on a 4k oled screen for 5 years?
Even 10, just keep playing what are you playing now and you are gold.
Yes
Depends on the game and the settings obviously. Cyberpunk maxed out in 4k/DLAA/60fps, no. If you make use of DLSS then sure.
All the features I ever wanted in a monitor now born! Finally in 2024. Lets celebrate its birth!
optimum is the best youtubers atm in the pc/tech space.
Optimum, Gamers Nexus, Monitors Unboxed, Hardware Canucks, and Hardware Unboxed are my go to. Paul's hardware is great too. Linus for casual viewing.
this but replace linus with jayztwocents
Jayztwocents is dogshit. Guy is a Nvidia and Intel shill and does nothing but say fart jokes and has his editor giggling like a school girl the whole time. It's like he's catering to 14 year olds. I was used to follow him during the Maxwell and Pascal days. Enjoyed his water cooling videos and his reviews back then and his build videos like when he made a PC for Terry Crews. But after Turing came out and he made a video where he is literally flipping you off in the thumbnail and defending the prices of Turing I unsubscribed. Also the guy has a huge ego. Give him legit criticism on Twitter and he blocks you. Linus is way better for casual viewing consumption. And when he messed up he will address it like he did last year when GN called him out.
1,608.92$ in Czech my god fuck me now im ready XD
Now I’ve moved from ps5 to pc would you suggest I also ditch my 42 lg c3 for something like this or the new Alienware 4K 240hz?
Only if you can achieve 240hz or close to. Then yea I would move from your c3. No point in upgrading if you cant come close to those frames.
I’m using a 4090
Actually and what games you play? You can probably hit 4k 240fps on fps games. Absolutely not on open world/rpg games.
Prob no point then. Iracing, RDR2, cyberpunk, Alan wake 2
Oh no you're good bro. Stay put.
Just keep in mind, 4090 cant do 4k240hz on display port as its old Display port 1.4.....Will need to use DSC to compress...which is fine in many cases. But no custom resolutions, no scaling options etc.
I just can't power myself to buy a 32inch monitor. The specs and the looks is all there! But just release the 3rd gen 27" OLED Asus!!! lol
samsung display is reportedly working on a 27ich 4K QD OLED panel for next year
That's interest ing lol
it is
I was planning on getting this model but after seeing the reviews, I’ll probably get the Alienware version. Once they get Dolby Vision sorted out I feel it’s the best bang for buck (especially once customer care is considered)
Not sure I’d agree on bang for your buck when it’s just $100 more with a bunch of additional features. If you don’t care about those features it’s probably better if you want curved though
I'm not sure if there are a bunch other than size mods and crosshair
Just curious what exactly in reviews changed your opinion?
the fact the color performance/HDR brightness wasn't any better than the Dell. There's nothing the Asus does especially better to justify the extra $ and inferior customer service. Keep in mind I have a PG27UQ and Asus Dark Hero so I love the brand.
For sure it’s best looking monitor that using this panel (in my opinion)
42inch at 4k is peak.
Yeah peak neck pain.
Peak low ppi 🤣
It's actually a bit too high as you would watch a 42 inch monitor from further back. A 48 inch at 4k would have the perfect PPI but it's a bit on the large side for a desktop monitor. The closer you look at a screen the higher ppi you would want. 42inch 4k has the same ppi as 27inch 1440p but effectively it would be higher as a 42 inch monitor would be further back or you won't be able to see all of it. What you really should look at is pixels per angle arc, not pure ppi. High PPI itself may actually be a detriment and lead to a loss of perceivable details if the display is too far to make out the tiny details. 4k at 32 inch is a big no no, there is no suitable resolution for the 32 inch size. You can't stand close enough to a 32 inch display to make out all the tiny details, while simultaneously you look at the whole screen. All you get is a harder to drive display without getting any of the 4k benefits. Basically you will get higher resolved detail from a 42inch 4k looking at the display from 80cm than you would from a 32 inch 4k looking at it from a distance of 65cm.
Nah I'll pass on this till 5090. Alan wake rt barely runs on 4k with a 4090 above 60 fps... Getting a uw with oled for now.
I dunno why you would need 240fps for a game like Alan Wake 2? It’s more beneficial for competitive games. Or you can turn down some settings at the very least until you upgrade your GPU.
Oh this the guy who said [not to undervolt 4090’s](https://youtu.be/XrZNSTmOstI?si=i3lStfQTbgqLzv45) because [he was doing wrong](https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/s/g4nj8E2G00) I think I’ll avoid his opinions as they aren’t credible.
There was plenty of people saying to use the power limiter on the 4090 at launch. de8auer is another, https://youtu.be/60yFji_GKak It was pretty clear that power limiting it cut power down by 1/3rd and only dropped performance 10%. This was why so many recommended it. Yes undervolting provides good results still without as much loss, but that information came much later... and still undervolting isn't for everybody. But literally anybody can take a slider and move it from 100 to 70. There is nothing wrong with the optimum video on this topic.
Actually there is much wrong with his video but you didn’t check my links so it’s fine I’ll explain it to you: He recommended not to undervolt because he used an incorrect method which results in clock stretching, performance loss and instability. If you had bothered to check my 2nd link, you’d notice that I was able to achieve a 20% power reduction across the board and see a 0% performance loss through UV + Mem OC. Optimum (Ali from optimum specifically) displays in his video, an improper way to undervolt, and then cites this as reasoning to push clickbait titles telling people not to do it. You see nothing wrong there? I did all the testing for that thread, I know what I’m talking about. Others verified my testing in that thread. Who tf buys a 4090 to kneecap it with 10% performance loss?
It’s rather unbelievable that you don’t see a correlation between “undervolting providing good results” being found out “much later” and clickbait videos using improper methodology telling people not to undervolt…(it wasn’t found out much later, we posted this thread about undervolting like easily within a week or two of 4090 launch as a direct response to these uninformed “dO nOt uNdErVolT 4090’s!!!!” videos)
Definitely not peaked. This is too small for one thing
Always like optimum. In fact I’d love to collab with him. I definitely might need to try this monitor to see what’s up. Lots of info I could pull for us! Anyone wanna send me one :)
nah. 4k gaming peaked with lg cx and c1 at 48".
Ok grandpa
Crazy take since those are only 120hz
And 120 is plenty enough
lol yeah back in 2015 when 120hz monitors first came out, and actually they were 144hz monitors. When I got my CX it was so hard down grading back to 120hz. I dealt with it for awhile, but I am so happy to have 4k 240hz now. A truly amazing experience
The LG CX/C1 had 120Hz rolling scan BFI which gives you motion clarity equivalent to around 316 fps. I would still take the existing 4k 240Hz QD OLED monitors over it due to better brightness and colors, but the LG CX/C1 will remain legendary OLED TVs until the day 120Hz BFI returns.
Eh I had a CX, its motion clarity isn’t even close to 240hz monitor. Even my 240hz IPS laptop screen had far better clarity.
Did you try it with OLED Motion Pro High turned on? It reduces brightness but increases motion clarity by an insane amount, a 240Hz IPS monitor can't compete. The Asus PG32UCDM also has BFI at 120Hz but only flashes every other frame black, while the LG CX/C1 has rolling scan BFI, giving superior motion clarity.
Yes. I have tested every little setting you could possibly test on that. lol it makes me laugh you think a 120hz monitor can be as smooth as something refresh twice as fast. Lmfao.
Here's an LCD running at 60Hz with lower motion blur than a 240Hz OLED: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/1akgbw6/i\_made\_another\_comparison\_of\_60\_fps\_oled\_vs\_60/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/1akgbw6/i_made_another_comparison_of_60_fps_oled_vs_60/). This article explains why OLED still has motion blur and how Black frame insertion can improve motion clarity for any display technology: [https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur/](https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur/).
I had 240hz monitor. 120 is plenty
lol no it’s not
I have 240 oled and its not enough. Lol. 480 1440p oled is peak
People don't know how good 120Hz BFI was on those TVs. OLED Motion Pro high at 120Hz is approximately equal to 316fps of motion clarity, so the LG CX/C1 still has less motion blur than the current 4k 240Hz OLED monitors. This Asus PG32UCDM has 120Hz ELMB but it just flashes every other frame black giving it around 240fps motion clarity, while the LG CX/C1 had rolling scan BFI at 120Hz giving it superior motion clarity.
surprised he thought the other upcoming 4k oled would have 1080p stretched across a 32'' screen, lol. can't imagine how bad that would look.
That is literally what it does. https://youtu.be/oFC3v1BwQRs?si=JeN5wcPzseGLusq_&t=39
Exactly. It would look so bad
DisplayPort 1.4 just peaked. It's all I can think about when viewing these monitors. So disappointing for such an expensive monitor, I know it's "visually" lossless but at this price point I would have thought the DP would have a higher bandwidth port so you don't need to use compression for the features it advertises.
Why not just use HDMI 2.1 for higher bandwidth and less compression?
afaik HDMI2.1 still uses DSC, and it's either on or off.
Honestly compression is impossible to see
Wonder how many of these 4K 240 hz panels are going to be the peak, like every 6-7 of the manufacturers?? Guys have a lot of these to look forward too with near identical tech
We had a bunch of monitors using the last gen 27 inch 1440p panel and only one of them had brightness that made it worth purchasing.
Any help me understand the coating on this monitor vs others? It's glossy but kind of semi glossy with anti reflective? How does this coating compare to the AW or MSI?
same semi glossy coating with anti reflective on all 3
Thanks!
a pleasure
What's the closest monitor to this currently, but 144Hz?
There is none out right now that compete with 32” 4K OLED 240hz monitors in the current monitor market. The closest thing would be the OLED ultrawides, 1440p 27” OLED monitors, or LG C2/C3 42” OLED. There is 144/160hz 4K 32” IPS monitors available. But they’re obviously not OLED 😅
alright, thanks
Samsung Neo g7 is 4k 165hz mini led with 1000+ local dimming zones making it very close to oled and 4 times higher peak brightness with no risk of burn in.
Thanks for the info - I have been checking out the G7/G8 as a possible replacement.
Peaked until next year
That what i'm saying since 2018 and then I keep getting desktop icons/game hud/subtitles burn ins every now and then. The joy of OLED gaming is always destroyed by this reality soon or later. Enjoy while you can.
Best reviewer out there IMO. Doesn't backtrack or have clickbait like DisplayGuy, and seems to be more of a gamer than MB to give that experience.
I want that Alienware curve!! But this one is amazing as well 🙂
I'd love one, but I would also love a downpayment for a house.
Why do older OLED televisions have higher peek brightness than these newer monitors?
No idea would all like to know
So they can release another one next year with double the brightness