September 13, 2017 at 9:26 pm #44599
I have the following system….
i7 6700k at 4.6Ghz
16GD DDR4 at 3200mhz
1080Ti Xtreme GPU
27″ 1440p Benq for display.
The 27″ Benq will soon be needed on another system and I have been considering a replacement. I have considered the Acer Predator 4k monitor noted in the title as it seems to tick the boxes that I would have liked with a 32″ 4k screen and Gsync included. My style of gaming and choices of games will not benefit from a faster refresh rate and so 1440p and 144hz+ is something that I have not really considered useful. I have had one 21:9 monitor in the past at 29″ and suffered from vertical desktop room as well as not all games being adapted well to use it.
AFAIK it stands alone at that size and resolution with Gsync, so not much else in the way of choice.
I had considered the BenQ PD3200U 32-inch 4K Designer Monitor but it does not have Gsync and yet it might not have the same screen glitching that I have read the Acer, and others which use the same panel, do…?
The Acer has this as an issue….
and the 20+ page thread about this, acknowledged by Acer, can be seen here….
I understand that other monitors which use the AU Optronics M320QAN01 32″ 4K panel and similar 27″ 4K from AUO are also affected with the random glitch issue.
I am trying to understand from others here if they have experienced that type of glitching and whilst it should not happen I’m trying to deal with what does and get my head around whether it is acceptable or not.
As noted there doesn’t seem to be a great deal of choice when it comes to the size and resolution, along with Gsync, for me to look at alternatives but that doesn’t mean I can’t delay a purchase or consider alternatives of similar cost that I have not thought about.
Any thoughts please from those who have owned such a monitor…?September 13, 2017 at 9:32 pm #44601
Hi Vimes and welcome,
Whilst I don’t have experience with the Acer XB321HK, I have plenty of experience with models using the same panel or a variant of it and am fully aware of the flickering issue. As I noted in my review of the BenQ PD3200U, which is one such monitor (see ‘a note on flickering’ in the calibration section), the issue was really not something that bothered me on my GTX 1070. It was frequent and distracting on my older AMD Radeon GPU, however. It is simply one of those things that you will have to learn to accept on the monitor. At least knowing it is likely to be infrequent, very short lived and entirely normal might help.
And of course, if you don’t get on with it, make sure you’re backed up by an appropriate returns policy just in case.September 15, 2017 at 9:04 am #44606
Thanks for the welcome and link to the Benq review, appreciated.
After reading your note section from the mentioned review I’m not sure how I feel anout this flicker and the monitors affected with it. I’m also giving consideration to the monitors resale value, perhaps that would be a little academic at the time of sale.
I had considered the BenQ PD3200U 32-inch 4K Designer Monitor (2017) and I do know that there are differences between that and the Acer noted. A different panel (no flicker), pretty good colours and accuracy but no Gsync. I am getting advise that even with a Ti1080 it would be advisable to have a monitor with adaptive sync technology, Gsync in this case, over that of one without at 4k.
Still the BenQ PD3200U 32-inch 4K Designer Monitor seems might tempting.
I understand what you mean about a returns policy but using the retailer you are noting since 2000 I still have to be aware that they do operate a system of balance when it comes to returning expensive items. In 2013 I returned two Viewsonic models before I ended up with my Benq 1440p, which was acceptable. I do know of someone similar who has received a warning letter from them regarding returns. I could link you up to that if you wanted to read it;.
So at the moment it is the Acer with Gsync and flicker of the Benq without either.I must admit either seems t be worthy of consideration but I’m not sure how much Gsync would be important, never used it before.
Not sure why but the email notification does not work and I was not aware of a response, just for info.September 15, 2017 at 9:18 am #44607
If you use Amazon fairly regularly and don’t return an excessive amount, they’re usually absolutely fine. Their returns policy is excellent and absolutely not something I would be afraid to take advantage of. And by that I mean use every now and then. The vast majority of users, even when returning expensive items, will have no issues whatsoever with that side of things.
With a GTX 1080Ti (or any single GPU for that matter), you can’t expect to gain a consistent 60fps at 3840 x 2160 of you whack all of the settings onto ‘ultra’. Then again, doing so is foolish as the visual advantage in many of those settings is negligible compared to the performance impact. You’ll soon see that a mixture of high, medium and ultra settings (depends on title) yields very attractive visuals and performance for ‘4K’ on a higher end GPU. Also, as we explore in relevant reviews , G-SYNC isn’t a magic bullet. Low frame rates remain low frame rates regardless. And it’s still the case that higher is better for FPS even with variable refresh rates in play.
I’m not sure why the notification system wouldn’t be working. Unless the notification went into a spam or junk folder. Or maybe just a bug. Perhaps you’ll get a notification this time.September 15, 2017 at 9:27 am #44608
The notification system worked this time, thanks 🙂
I understand your point regarding Amazon and yes I do use it regularly, as noted since the year 2000. Over the last six months I have spent around £1200 with zero returns, so no valid concerns on my part. I just feel that even if you mentally adjust your expectations to what is on the market from what you expect to be delivered it can still be a bit of a panel lottery on how well you do. Some retailers and manufacturers just add a comfort layer to deal with these issues over that of others.
Good points also about low FPS. I’m kinda wondering about those 30 to 60fps averages and whether Gsync would offer a real advantage over that of not having any, not in terms of what other issues low FPS can bring but just that of tearing. As noted the Benq monitor does seem quite favourable otherwise.September 15, 2017 at 9:29 am #44609
Sensitivity to tearing and stuttering varies. How do you find such inconsistencies in frame rate and refresh rate on your current monitor?September 15, 2017 at 9:36 am #44610
You are right, my wife struggles to see “false controing” (banding) on our Plasma TV. She doesn’t seem to notice frame rate stutters when panning scenes are displayed either. Some people see these things whilst others are largely oblivious.
I have been playing No Mans Sky recently at 1440p. It took me a while to figure out that adaptive Vsync was not on ( IIRC I had my 1070GTX) and the game exhibited tearing as it was split into “thirds” due to that at times.
Overclocking my monitor to 72hz with my 1080Ti and the frame rate remains locked at 72fps due to the brute force of the Ti at 1440p. The same seems to apply to all of my games tested so far, again you would expect to with the Ti. Perhaps 7D2D might be an issue on horde night etc. I need to play more of Rise of the Tomb Raider to find how that is.
Sadly I’m the person who sees and is bothered about such things, I do wish that I wasn’t. It is not the end of the world but would have been nice for the Acer to have at least eliminated that.September 15, 2017 at 4:20 pm #44611
You might be wondering how I got here…..
…but I have been reading your reviews and the AOC AG352UCG seems very different from what I have been looking at, in nearly every way, but I do notice that it uses a AU Optronics M350QVR01 AMVA panel and just because AU Optronics make the panel it doesn’t mean that it too can have a similar flicker issue…? Or would that be expected to have been just the 4k type panels…?
Sadly though the AOC has been out of stock in the UK from Amazon for a little while now.September 15, 2017 at 4:34 pm #44612
No flickering issue. It is nothing to do with the panel manufacturer (AUO), just the specific panel or more specifically the port controller used for DP on the M320QAN01. I thought you’d already worked out that 21:9 wasn’t a route that you wanted to go down? If that isn’t the case perhaps you were just noting that not all games support 21:9 (which is correct, although most still do). With a GTX 1080Ti you should really consider a model with superior image quality (such as the Samsung C34F791FD), even if you have to forgo G-SYNC. Again, you just have to be a bit crafty with the settings but with that much GPU horsepower getting 100fps at 3440 x 1440 isn’t much of a stretch most of the time.September 15, 2017 at 5:07 pm #44613
Many thanks for clarifying the points on tha tparticular issue noted.
When I last tried a 21:9 monitor it was a 29″ LG type with a 1080p vertical height. The monitor was not a good one, being sold as new when it was in fact a returned faulty one confirmed by LG when I tried to register it for warranty purposes. It should not have been sold in the UK, or so I was told.
But my biggest issue at the time with the format was that height. With a 21:9 and a 1440p type it will be very similar to my 27″ monitor with extra to each side.
Apart from YT videos and some cut scenes in games being in 16:9 using an UW does offer other advantages.
At the time I bought into that aspect ratio it was very new with very little gaming support and also quite expensive.
Just clicking through reviews and other articles has now made me consider that today’s 21:9#’s could be a option worthy of consideration. It might actually work better (in FPS terms at least) with my 1080Ti.
Interesting that you refer to the Samsung’s display as being superior to that of the AOC, even putting the Gsync aside for it…..?! That surprised me.
I see that it does also offer a low blue light setting, I use that a LOT with my Benq BL2710PT – amazing how it reduces eye strain when reading. I have it on the highest setting of 70%
I will read about the Samsung you note. I will, of course, purchase through your links when I have decided on the one to buy.September 15, 2017 at 5:46 pm #44614
It might also be worth taking a look at this post and some of the other posts in that thread as well. The main thing about the Samsung when compared to the AOC is that it offers superior colour consistency, so colours retain saturation better at different areas of the screen. Or more specifically, the colours remain relatively rich even at the bottom and edges of the screen. This is also aided by the fact the colour gamut is more generous on the Samsung, so colours are naturally more vibrant anyway. I find this difference fairly significant myself, although it is again subjective and not everybody would find it as pronounced. There would be a lot of love for a monitor using the Samsung panel with G-SYNC support, but so far that hasn’t transpired.
And I absolutely agree with the restrictive height of 29″ 21:9 models (similar to a 23″ 16:9 model). The 34″ 3440 x 1440 experience is far superior in my view.September 15, 2017 at 6:30 pm #44615
Many thanks, I have read and will continue to do so 🙂
I do not want to overwhelm you with questions when I can search and ponder but I’ll try and make this one my last(ish)…..
The Samsung you link would it be as capable as the Samsung LC34H890WJUXEN UWQHD 34-Inch Curved Monitor – Dark Silver which is sold at Amazon.
I ask because I prefer that models colour and style but was not sure if the rest of the specifications and qualities you have noted be similar…? The other one noted includes the word “gaming” in its title.
At the time that I bought my 29″ 21:9, and wondered what had happened the bottom third of the monitor, as it seemed chopped off, it made me wonder how people expressed how much they were enjoying their 25″ 21:9….! That really is a letter box….!September 15, 2017 at 8:44 pm #44616
You are changing your “best image quality” in 21:9 from the Asus to the Samsung?
Before you buy, try and use one of the 21:9’s. I ffound the Samsung 791 to be lovely to look at but too short.
BjornSeptember 15, 2017 at 9:08 pm #44617
I understand what you mean and checked what a 32″ 16.9 could offer me instead, especially at 4k over the Samsung or my own.
A consideration about the Samsung or any 21.9 at 34″ is the same vertical height as my 27″ 1440p.September 15, 2017 at 9:27 pm #44618
The Samsung C34H890 uses the same panel as the ASUS MX34VQ. So less steep curvature than the CF791 (1800R vs. 1500R) and a slightly narrower colour gamut. So slightly weaker colour vibrancy. Other core characteristics can be expected to be quite similar.
Where did I state that the ASUS MX34VQ had better image quality than the Samsung?! You must be misinterpretting something as I wouldn’t have said that. It’s not true, although it depends what one means by “better image quality”.September 15, 2017 at 9:39 pm #44619
I’m reasonably certain you recommended the Asus a few weeks ago. If memory serves (and it might not) then it was a week or two after I joined the forum. It might have been for it’s implementation of free-sync, I really don’t recall.September 15, 2017 at 9:45 pm #44620
That would’ve been for a specific reason, nothing to do with “better image quality” per se. I don’t recall what the reason was. If sRGB image accuracy over vibrancy, FreeSync implementation or input lag were concerns then it might’ve been recommended specifically. Relevant post – https://forum.pcmonitors.info/topic/best-ultrawide-gaming-monitor/page/4/#post-43268September 16, 2017 at 9:09 am #44622
AFAIK both the Acer XB321HK and the BenQ PD3200U suffer from the same sporadic flicker issue (same panels, TCONs, etc.), at least I saw people commenting on it for the BenQ thread at HardForums (and for the previous version too, the BL3201PT)… So that’s not exactly a reason to choose one or the other.
It didn’t seem like a deal breaker to me tho, just about everyone that returned one seemed to do it for a number of other combined QC issues and not just the flicker thing on it’s own, there’s far worse endemic issues to other panels tbh. I’ve actually been debating between the Acer and the BenQ myself (while keeping an eye out for LG 32UD99 reviews).
The main difference seems to be G-Sync, but at least in the US that alone makes the Acer fetch an extra $500 or so ($800-900 vs $1,300). I’m all for investing in a good display that’ll last me a decade but that’s a 50%+ difference, and I kinda like the BenQ stand better as well. So I’m undecided as well…
The other difference I spotted is that the Acer only supports HDCP 1.2 (so no 4K Netflix etc?)… Honestly G-Sync might be all that and a slice of bread but from a longevity and general usability standpoint the BenQ seems like the better buy, so that’s the direction I’m leaning. Not to hijack the thread or anything but here’s where I’m coming from… (gonna split this to a second post)September 16, 2017 at 9:09 am #44621
Right now I’m running 3x 24″ 1920×1200 Dell U2412Ms, which I’ll occasionally use in EyeFinity mode be it in landscape orientation (5760×1200) or portrait despite the bezels (makes for like a 40″-ish 3600×1920 display). I thought about going with a 40-43″ but it seems kludgey for everyday use and they make other compromises, plus there’s no DPI advantage there.
I do a fair bit of photo editing work in addition to gaming so I wanted to stick with IPS and avoid curved displays, so 40″ is out and so are most ultra wides… A 1440p would be a decent jump in res but the surface area of a 16:9 27″ is just a couple inches wider than that of a 16:10 24″ (and like, not really any taller)… Might as well just stick to EyeFinity.
So that’s what made me start looking at 32″ displays as a good middle ground for immersion and general productivity. I’m leaning towards getting the BenQ and keeping two of my 24″ in portrait on the sides, then mayyybe down the road I can add either a cheaper 27″ 1440p 144Hz display in place of the 2x 24″, or a 2nd 30″+ 4K 144Hz if they become reality and the GPU horsepower is there.
The BenQ seems more complete as a display I can use in various roles down the road, but maybe I’m just fooling myself into not spending the extra dough for G-Sync and the Acer. I’ll pony up what I need to either way as far as GPUs, tho I’ll likely start with a single 1080Ti (not much more expensive than the 2x R9 290 I have now and it’ll be nice to go back to a single card for a while).September 16, 2017 at 9:16 am #44625
The thing to remember about the BenQ BL3200U is that, although it has the same flickering issue over DP as the Acer, you can simply circumvent that by using HDMI 2.0 instead. That is certainly an option with the OP’s GTX 1080Ti, which is a GPU model you were also considering, but not your current Radeon 290s. The Radeon 290 was also the GPU where I noticed a horrendous amount of flickering via DP on the BenQ.
I can’t really give much of a technical comparison between the BenQ and Acer without testing, but the BenQ was very nicely calibrated indeed. And I suspect better than the Acer. There is also more flexibility in the OSD with respect to gamma modes and, although not to everyone’s taste, Low Blue Light settings. I agree that it seems to be the more complete, well-rounded ‘future proof’ package even without G-SYNC. And it’s why I don’t specifically recommend the XB321HK – plus I’ve received enough user feedback with worrying QC issues on that model to make me wonder. Although I know all too well that this can be the case to an extent with any monitor, unfortunately. And people are more inclined to give feedback about things like that if it’s negative rather than positive, so it paints a scewed picture.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.