Zadak Spark RGB DDR4 4133 MHz 4x 8 GB review
Addlink S70 1TB NVMe M.2 SSD review
G.Skill KM360 Keyboard Review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
Alphacool EISBAER Ex BLACK LCS review
Netgear Nighthawk AX12 Wi-Fi 6 router review
Corsair HS60 PRO Surround Headset Review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 Gaming X review
Team Group Cardea II NVMe 1 TB SSD Review
ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming ITX/TB3 review
AOC AGON AG241QG and AG241QX are WQHD and 144Hz+
AOC is to release two WQHD (2560x1440) AG241QG and AG241QX monitors based on a 23.8" TN panel. They fall in the gamers AGON line-up with both a Adaptive sync (FreeSync) and GSync model.
The 23.8” TN panels with a 2560 x 1440 (WQHD) resolution means business at a nice 123.41 PPI. The ‘QX’ model features a 30 – 144Hz variable refresh rate range with Adaptive-Sync (AMD FreeSync compatible). The ‘QG’ model features a 30 – 165Hz variable refresh rate range with Nvidia G-SYNC support reports pcmonitors.info
Both screens offer a 1000:1 static contrast ratio and support for 8-bit colour. A 1ms grey to grey response time is specified. The ‘QX’ model features ‘Low Blue Light’ settings and an ‘AOC Shadow Control’ setting (gamma enhancement) to increase details in dark areas. The ‘QG’ model, has ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur) as an Nvidia-specific feature. Both models support 100 x 100mm VESA mounting.
Outpust are DP 1.2 (supporting either G-SYNC or Adaptive-Sync for the ‘QG’ and ‘QX’, respectively), HDMI, a 3.5mm headphone jack and 4 USB 3.0 ports. The HDMI port is MHL-compatible for the ‘QX’ model and there is also an additional DVI port on that one. There are integrated speakers – 2W for the ‘QG’ model and 3W for the ‘QX’ model.
Details on the 23.8” QG and QX models can be found at the links. They’re currently expected in November in the UK at MSRPs of £519/575 euro and £389/430 euro for the ‘QG’ and ‘QX’ models, respectively. Availability in regions such as the US is not currently known.
HonoredShadow
Senior Member
Posts: 4266
Joined: 2007-05-27
Senior Member
Posts: 4266
Joined: 2007-05-27
#5345787 Posted on: 10/14/2016 01:18 PM
Yet more terrible monitors with horrible black levels... The only way to get your games looking good is with great colours and black levels, not hz.
Yet more terrible monitors with horrible black levels... The only way to get your games looking good is with great colours and black levels, not hz.
LimitbreakOr
Senior Member
Posts: 374
Joined: 2015-04-02
Senior Member
Posts: 374
Joined: 2015-04-02
#5345804 Posted on: 10/14/2016 01:56 PM
I've recently came up with a great idea for my 28inch 4k monitor. By running it at 3840 x 1646 instead of 2160. I've turned my monitor into a smaller paranomic 21:9 running at 1646p. This makes sense as 4k is really hard to run at a nice fps on modern games and running it at ultrawide paranomic looks very cool.
I've recently came up with a great idea for my 28inch 4k monitor. By running it at 3840 x 1646 instead of 2160. I've turned my monitor into a smaller paranomic 21:9 running at 1646p. This makes sense as 4k is really hard to run at a nice fps on modern games and running it at ultrawide paranomic looks very cool.
kpetrov
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2015-12-18
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2015-12-18
#5345808 Posted on: 10/14/2016 02:06 PM
If you play chess - yes , but in fast , dynamic games there is no place to compare!
Yet more terrible monitors with horrible black levels... The only way to get your games looking good is with great colours and black levels, not hz.
If you play chess - yes , but in fast , dynamic games there is no place to compare!
HonoredShadow
Senior Member
Posts: 4266
Joined: 2007-05-27
Senior Member
Posts: 4266
Joined: 2007-05-27
#5345906 Posted on: 10/14/2016 06:38 PM
Not true and I have 144 Hz monitors and they have their place for like BF3, 4 etc but anything else? Nope. So don't exaggerate.
If you're not playing competitively then you could go for something else that would be far better in quality.
Besides I play a number of games competitively and when I decide to go downstairs to play on my TV which is far better quality picture wise I enjoy the games more and it does not seem to affect my performance tbf.
I can tell the difference in smoothness but I for one enjoy my games more. If I really want to be competitive I will go upstairs but competitive is not everything. Not every game is competitive.
Not true and I have 144 Hz monitors and they have their place for like BF3, 4 etc but anything else? Nope. So don't exaggerate.
If you're not playing competitively then you could go for something else that would be far better in quality.
Besides I play a number of games competitively and when I decide to go downstairs to play on my TV which is far better quality picture wise I enjoy the games more and it does not seem to affect my performance tbf.
I can tell the difference in smoothness but I for one enjoy my games more. If I really want to be competitive I will go upstairs but competitive is not everything. Not every game is competitive.
Witcher29
Senior Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: 2015-06-02
Senior Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: 2015-06-02
#5346022 Posted on: 10/14/2016 10:43 PM
To small lol.
23 inch for 1680x1050
27inch for 1920x1080
32 inch for 2560 x 1440
34 ich and up for 4k
@ least for me.
To small lol.
23 inch for 1680x1050
27inch for 1920x1080
32 inch for 2560 x 1440
34 ich and up for 4k
@ least for me.
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 9232
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 9232
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5346159 Posted on: 10/15/2016 03:01 AM
When I saw the title I was hoping for some decent 27" monitors at a reasonable price. Then I actually took half a second to process the title and realized they're in the 24" category. Then I clicked the link -__- and saw that they're TNs... and somehow cost a stupid amount.
575 Euros for a 23.8" TN? Go home AOC, you're drunk. I'll take my chances with the random Chinese ****ter company spewing out 27" 144Hz IPS panels for $390 or $440 for a "pixel perfect" one. That sounds like a steal until you realize you're still paying $440 for a 27" monitor just because it isn't imprisoned at 60Hz.
When I saw the title I was hoping for some decent 27" monitors at a reasonable price. Then I actually took half a second to process the title and realized they're in the 24" category. Then I clicked the link -__- and saw that they're TNs... and somehow cost a stupid amount.
575 Euros for a 23.8" TN? Go home AOC, you're drunk. I'll take my chances with the random Chinese ****ter company spewing out 27" 144Hz IPS panels for $390 or $440 for a "pixel perfect" one. That sounds like a steal until you realize you're still paying $440 for a 27" monitor just because it isn't imprisoned at 60Hz.
Caradha
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2016-11-01
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2016-11-01
#5353410 Posted on: 11/01/2016 09:52 AM
hahahaha your narrow mind amuses me. Many other games benefit from 120hz+ and you only seem to be using "etc" in your sentence as you do not grasp this concept.
Fair point, but unfortunately this monitor is not aimed at "casuals", thus this is a comparison of 2 different groups, unfair imo.
Unfortunately your down fall in this paragraph is using "I". you are creating an opinion, which other people may see differently, thus making your comment invalid when reviewing/comparing this monitor as you are using your own opinion in favour of a fact, or even better, a majority vote of what people use to game with in regards to displays.
True, but this monitor (as i said once before) will be used in a competitive environment the majority of the time. yes 1440p skews this, but it is still considered a "competitive monitor" due to its response time, refresh rate and size (24 inches). The majorities of the games played on this monitor will be competitive games.
Not true and I have 144 Hz monitors and they have their place for like BF3, 4 etc but anything else? Nope. So don't exaggerate.
hahahaha your narrow mind amuses me. Many other games benefit from 120hz+ and you only seem to be using "etc" in your sentence as you do not grasp this concept.
If you're not playing competitively then you could go for something else that would be far better in quality.
Fair point, but unfortunately this monitor is not aimed at "casuals", thus this is a comparison of 2 different groups, unfair imo.
Besides I play a number of games competitively and when I decide to go downstairs to play on my TV which is far better quality picture wise I enjoy the games more and it does not seem to affect my performance tbf.
Unfortunately your down fall in this paragraph is using "I". you are creating an opinion, which other people may see differently, thus making your comment invalid when reviewing/comparing this monitor as you are using your own opinion in favour of a fact, or even better, a majority vote of what people use to game with in regards to displays.
I can tell the difference in smoothness but I for one enjoy my games more. If I really want to be competitive I will go upstairs but competitive is not everything. Not every game is competitive.
True, but this monitor (as i said once before) will be used in a competitive environment the majority of the time. yes 1440p skews this, but it is still considered a "competitive monitor" due to its response time, refresh rate and size (24 inches). The majorities of the games played on this monitor will be competitive games.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2645
Joined: 2014-10-20
Imo optimal resolution for 1080p. But too small for 1440p.