At $1299, Alienware new QD-OLED 34-inch monitor is available for preorder soon.
Click here to post a comment for At $1299, Alienware new QD-OLED 34-inch monitor is available for preorder soon. on our message forum
alanm
Wonder if they have a 38" version (3840x1600) like the AW3821. That over a 34" any day.
cucaulay malkin
Solfaur
IceVip
waltc3
What I'd look at is the warranty--which at three years is not bad for a $1200 OLED monitor--but I'd still like it to be a bit better. It would depend on what clauses, if any, are written into the warranty about the screen. ("Three-year warranty on all parts and labor, excluding the screen, which is warrantied for one year from purchase date" would kill my interest quickly...;)) I'm still enjoying the heck out of my $850 Philips 43" 4k WCG Quantum Dot, Display HDR-1k Certified. 60Hz but gorgeous--a real HDR eye-popper. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07D5S3QCS/?language=en_US&cstrackid=87aa175d-cfef-48d7-b0e4-be320caaa749&tag=wwwphilipsusa-20&th=1 Includes a 4yr Philips Advance Replacement warranty which I have not needed, glad to say. (I shouldn't pimp this monitor every time I do a monitor post, but I like this monitor so much I can't help myself.)
Looks like Philips isn't selling it any more through Amazon, though. What a crappy situation this hardware shortage has made of everything!
howiec
I wish there were 2 models, 1 for hardcore competitive games and 1 for more casual / non-competitive experiences.
Competitive, hardcore games need something similar to:
2560×1440, 27", 240Hz+(preferably 360 or 480Hz, obviously QD OLED's not there yet)
Non-competitive games need something similar to:
3840×2160, 32", 165Hz+ (preferably 240Hz or so)
This monitor's 3440x1440 res is a bit too high for stable, high FPS in most modern shooter/BR games (e.g. Apex Legends, Warzone) even with low settings (probably mostly due to shitty game engines & shitty dev coding - this definitely applies to Respawn).
3440x1440 res is fine for non-competitive games though I'd want 4K for non-competitive games... so this is a weird res for today's CPUs and GPUs where it doesn't quite fit competitive gaming nor high-end 4K quality, non-competitive gaming.
Yes, I do have a high-end, OC'd system (12900k + 3090 + DDR5).
I'm definitely buying the monitor anyway. 😉
MegaFalloutFan
More info:
[youtube=K88TWstPN7U]
EJocys
Human vision field is 220°:135° ~= 1.63 ~= 16:10. Monitor with 16:9 aspect ratio fits field of vision close to perfect, which is very good for immersion and rendering efficiency.
32" 3840x2160, 16:9 monitor have 138 pixels per inch - higher quality when surface of monitors are at the same distance.
34" 3440x1400, 21:9 monitor have 109 pixels per inch.
Problem with 21:9 aspect ratio:
- If you try to see whole monitor, then you will end up with 31% of empty space on top and bottom.
- If you try to cover full field of vision with it, then GPU will waste 25% of resources rendering things outside of human vision.
Problem with media: Most popular content, is 16:9. This means goodbye to 1:1 pixel sharp video quality in full screen, i.e. 4K will be downgraded. 16:9 content will have black bars on sides, so, basically you have 2488x1400 monitor and 1080p quality will be downgraded too, due to the up-scaling/resizing. In this case, upgrade from 3840x2160 (16:9) should be 5040x2160 (21:9) 🙂.
MegaFalloutFan
illrigger
theoneofgod
Loobyluggs
https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/ba9029df).
It uses HDMI 2.0...five years after HDMI 2.1 was released.
That, is criminal.
And, it's not even DCI 4K UHD...I mean, cmon guys.
As for the actual picture quality, I can probably put money on the fact it will be a truly excellent picture, that TrueBlack 400 rating it gets is rare and normally for mid-to-high-range OLED panels. No question on the picture quality at all, but HDMI 2.0 ?
I'm out.
Excuse the paraphrase, but if someone thinks this monitor is good, has not seen the specification table for it (Aura89
illrigger
Loobyluggs
illrigger
Jules
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme