June 29, 2017 at 9:19 pm #43667
Great review, thanks very much. For the price point the size, resolution, refresh rate all seem great value and I’m less concerned than most about usual “stickler” points like gamut.
I’d really like to be clicking your link and ordering but I still have a worry and that’s the physicality of it. My desk is 120cm x 65cm (though I do have an extendable keyboard tray) so it will fit but I’d like to have it as low down and far back as possible – and the Philips 328m6fjmb will be better in both regards according to design specs (only marginally but still). Any more info on the Philips?!
also I think you might have the height from the desk surface measurement wrong – you state 416mm / 13.4 inches – but that seems at least 10cm too short.
cheersJune 29, 2017 at 9:45 pm #43668
A pleasure, as always.
No more information on the Philips than is available in the news piece at the moment I’m afraid. Back to the AOC, though, the height of the screen at lowest stand height was indeed wrong. I have corrected this now. What I would say, though, is that it would probably still be worth seeing the AOC for yourself and making use of Amazon’s excellent returns policy (something you can’t do with the Philips currently) should you need it. You may get it well with everything about the monitor, including the stand. If it turns out you love the monitor but find the stand too deep, you can always buy a much better VESA 100 compatible stand and use that instead. One that would allow you to move the monitor closer to the wall than the existing stand or indeed the stand of the Philips.July 2, 2017 at 10:13 am #43743
I just bought this monitor, and noticed something strange. While freesync is enabled, I get a lot of flickering in games like : world of tanks (mostly the menu, but also in game), Age of empires 2 HD is unplayable because of the flickering and so on… The problem is also described here https://community.amd.com/thread/215821 . As the frame rate closes to the refresh rate of the monitor (144hz in this case) the problem is somewhat mitigated, but not complete. I also tried lowering the refres rate (100hz) and enabling freesync. The problem persists in this case also, but to a lesser extent. (i thought it would be beneficial because the MG279Q has a 90 hz max freesync rate..). I had many G-sync (it can happen there too, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujgRjsmwtgY&t=464s) and freesync monitors, and never noticed this problem. Perhaps my two RX 560’s are the problem beacuse they can’t handle freesync so well (?) . P.s. Yes, it happens with or without crossfire enabled.
Now, by disabling freesync the problem is gone, but that’s not the point. I’m very curious, have you also noticed this? Do you still have the monitor, so you can test this issue?
Thanks a lot 🙂 !July 2, 2017 at 10:16 am #43746
Yup, I’m afraid it’s a GPU or driver problem. Possibly linked to CrossFire. My single Radeon 290 had no such issues, which is why they aren’t noted in the review. In fact you can clearly see that such issues are absent from the video review, outside of very low frame rates (cut-scenes) where the issue was specifically mentioned.July 2, 2017 at 10:25 am #43747
Thank you for your answer.
It’s not a huge problem then, this is only a temporary setup until VEGA launches. 🙂July 7, 2017 at 11:46 am #43777
First of all – many thanks for the review of this monitor, for some reason many other editors somehow ignored the whole thing. Great job!
I would like to kindly ask you for one thing (sorry if I missed it in the comments or in the review):
How do I know, if a given piece of monitor Ag322qcx monitor is from the new series (the one you reviewed) or from the old series (the one that was faulty and you did not review it for that very reason?). I can see these monitors available for circa 450 euro exc. VAT, which is a good price, however I would like to be sure this is the right (newest) hardware revision. Any way to determine this ? Many thanks in advance!July 7, 2017 at 11:47 am #43779
My pleasure. The AG322QCX we reviewed with the overdrive issue at 144Hz was a pre-production sample never intended for retail. All retail samples should be fixed, similar to our second unit.July 7, 2017 at 4:22 pm #43780
Oh, that’s great. Would you recommend any particular checks once the monitor is delivered to me ? Something common for this monitors ?
BTW I’m still amazed that you seem to be the only redaction providing review for this interesting hardware!July 7, 2017 at 5:12 pm #43781
And even if other places had reviewed it, their reviews wouldn’t be a scratch on ours in terms of depth and completeness. 😉
I would simply recommend using the monitor as you normally do. If you feel inclined, check for pixel defects using this website – http://jasonfarrell.com/misc/deadpixeltest.php. But if you do find some defects, if they aren’t in obvious places then perhaps overlook them. Pixel defects are not all that uncommon when you’ve got millions of pixels on a screen, but if they are obvious during normal use or heavily clustered up then it’s a different matter.July 8, 2017 at 1:48 pm #43786
Design aside, but if this monitor would have been 27″ would you think it would not have gotten this minus in your review?
“Lacks the ‘wow factor’, detail and clarity that some models with higher pixel densities offer and a design that could be a bit divisive. That applies to many models, of course”
Or is it the coating that zaps away the wow factor?July 8, 2017 at 2:07 pm #43789
It’s all relative. I could’ve said the same about a 27″ 2560 x 1440 model lacking the ‘wow factor’ of a model of similar size (or even ~32″) with UHD resolution. That comment was specific to pixel density, screen surface was already mentioned seperately.July 8, 2017 at 3:07 pm #43798
I’ve had a 34″ (3440x1440p), 32″ (this AOC), 27″ (1440p) and old 24″ 1080p monitors and this is probably the overall sweet spot right now. Gaming wise the 34″ ultrawides are just way too expensive for what they provide and the difference to this 32″ AOC isn’t that big. The pixed density is something that I occasionally noticed but you just need to keep some distance so you avoid that and the VA-panel angle issues. The 27″ just felt too small after a 34″ and FPS games just need the 144 Hz compared to the 100-120 Hz from the ultrawides.July 9, 2017 at 7:53 am #43805
It’s all very subjective of course, and eyesight, viewing distance and preferences all come into play. For me I don’t find the pixel density of a 31.5″ 2560 x 1440 (or 24″ Full HD – which is similar) particularly impressive even from 80cm away. I’ve used dozens of UHD models, several 34″ 3440 x 1440 models and dozens of 27″ 2560 x 1440 models (don’t use the term 1440p, please) and many of these very shortly before or after using the AOC. The pixel density is certainly decent, but I’ll stick to my comment regarding the ‘wow factor’ lacking.July 9, 2017 at 8:28 am #43806
Yeah but gaming Wise you cant use UHD, 4K etc while getting 144hz. So its either 27″ or 31,5″ right now and in the foreseeable figure. And 31,5 with its lower PPI is more immersive than 27″ for gaming 🙂 or thats my opinion 🙂July 9, 2017 at 8:58 am #43807
Yes, but you certainly can get 2560 x 1440 models with high refresh rates and smaller screen sizes (hence higher pixel densities). The UHD models were just there to make an even stronger comparison. I agree with you about the actual screen size being nice to game on and as I’ve said pixel density is still pretty decent – certainly not what I’d call ‘poor’.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.