ALIENWARE 34 CURVED QD-OLED GAMING MONITOR - AW3423DW Hype

[e22big]

36 minutes ago, MonitorFlicker said:

Rting doesn't have PG32UQX. It's also not measured in 1000nits, it's measured in 100nits. The contrast will rise easily.

In 10% window, the contrast is 100,000:1 

In 100% window, the contrast is easily above 90,0000:1 

 

Also, the brightness is sustained. The miniLEDs are from Qistar/BenQ. You shouldn't have doubted that. 

 

If you've seen both displays, knowing what PG32UQX is capable of, you wouldn't have a second doubt about its HDR performance is better than any other Samsung's HDR monitors or TVs with ABL miniLEDs. You put monitors with Qistar/BenQ's miniLED vs Samsung's ABL miniLED side by side, the result will be very exactly like my comparison pictures.

 

If you want argue further, open another topic in this forum instead of the original topic about choosing a monitor. 

The native contrast for the other monitor isn't for PG32UQX, it's for Acer Predator X27. Just to point out that having VESA HDR 1000 certificaiton doesn't mean much (and yes it does have contrast in tens or hundreads of thousands to one in the best case scenario.  

 

I have no doubt that PG32UQX HDR performance would be better ( without the help of TV picture processing), especially in bright scene, after all, it can do 1000 nit sustained in 100 percent window and have more local dimming zones. What I doubt those to matter, certainly not at the asking price. 

 

1000 nit brightness is rarely required for a 100 percent windows. That's like you're displaying the sun in full screen all the time, it's needed more often than not for highlight and at 25 percent windows and below, the PG32UQX isn't especially brighter than QN90B. We've already talked about that, QN90N sustain 25 percent brightness is 1400 nit which is just 200 shine of PG32UQX and it's peaking at well above 2000 nit in 10 percent and smaller windows (rting did list a sustained brightness in their data.) I don't think it matters, to make a different. both are as bright as it gets for an HDR display. The point is that I don't think the image from PG32UQX will be significantly differ from what shows above. It would still have some blooming and elevated black in dark scene due to the limitation of its panel, and no amount of brightness can help with that.

 

Here if you wanted a more apple to apple comparison. This is from PA32UCX which use the same panel as PG32UQX, it does in fact have a far worse haloing effect than any VA TV despite the same amount of dimming zone and bright level. Elevated black is also reported just like any FALD IPS. 

 

*But I did check with rting and their testing methodlogy and you're right they do test most monitor at 100 nit, sorry about that. There's one model where they test at full backlight so I thought that was the norm. 
 

 

 

 

 

[MonitorFlicker]

26 minutes ago, e22big said:

1000 nit brightness is rarely required for a 100 percent windows. That's like you're displaying the sun in full screen all the time, it's needed more often than not for highlight and at 25 percent windows and below, the PG32UQX isn't especially brighter than QN90B. We've already talked about that, QN90N sustain 25 percent brightness is 1400 nit which is just 200 shine of PG32UQX and it's peaking at well above 2000 nit in 10 percent and smaller windows (rting did list a sustained brightness in their data.) I don't think it matters, to make a different. both are as bright as it gets for an HDR display. The point is that I don't think the image from PG32UQX will be significantly differ from what shows above. It would still have some blooming and elevated black in dark scene due to the limitation of its panel, and no amount of brightness can help with that.

 

Arguing monitors vs TVs are not apple to apple in the first place considering how closer you sit in front the monitor.

I always talk about monitors, not TVs unless TVs are involved somehow in the discussion. 

The problem with HDR content availability is not the problem with the monitor itself. 

When more contents mastered for HDR 2000 or HDR 4000 arrive in the future, PG32UQX will easily stand out.  

[MonitorFlicker]

16 hours ago, BS_ArtStuff said:

Getting back to the monitors. I definitely don’t play enough games to warrant special refresh rates. Like @MonitorFlickersaid my workflow is definitely 8/1-2hrs so I’m a light gamer. Visual quality accuracy with colors, contrast and brightness range are more important. I just wanted a monitor that’s at least 144hz so I’m not restricted when playing an fps on occasion. @StahlmannIm sure your experience with the AW is true. And I can imagine there’s flickering too for people. Which is why what worries me most about the AW is that its Gen 1…

 

Reliability is key to my quest here, since this will be a work computer cause I work in game industry remotely… So i don’t want to gamble too much despite their great warranty. 
 

I haven’t heard anyone talk about the LG UltraGear 34GP950G-B 34.0" 3440x1440 180 Hz Monitor yet, does this mean it’s not in the same league even as the AW QD-OLED and the PG35VQ?

 

Im open to other monitors besides these three in the 32”-38” range. The Samsungs have a really steep curve which isn’t the best for my work since I need to avoid warping as much as possible. However the Samsung Neo G8 is looking fine as hell. 

Don't know if you can find a new PG35VQ for under $1500. It has the best colors, contrast, and brightness overall. HDR performance is the closest to a reference HDR 1000 monitor in ultrawide. SDR is also unrivaled.

 

The DC dimming backlight is built to last. You can turn on the monitor 24/7 at max brightness for years. I don't turn off my computers, the PG35VQ is kept on for 3 years and I never had an issue with it. The screen has no flickering at all and it is very comfortable to look at for long hours at high brightness.

 

If you are not familiar with HDR, this monitor will still be the best example for a reference HDR 1000 experience in movies and games in the coming years. It is the experience the environment artists and game designers want you to have. I think you might need one in your work/gaming scenario despite its slower response time and blooming in browsing. 

 

Also, you can already tell the forum hasn't matured yet. You need to do research and findings on your own as the back-up. 

 

 

 

 

[e22big]

12 hours ago, MonitorFlicker said:

Arguing monitors vs TVs are not apple to apple in the first place considering how closer you sit in front the monitor.

I always talk about monitors, not TVs unless TVs are involved somehow in the discussion. 

The problem with HDR content availability is not the problem with the monitor itself. 

When more contents mastered for HDR 2000 or HDR 4000 arrive in the future, PG32UQX will easily stand out.  

Umn.. why? PG32UQX can't even reach 2000 nit in any windows size, if anything a 2000 or 4000 nits mastered content will hurt it a bit more than one that master at 1000 nits.

 

It's biggest strenght is the ability to display 1000 nit sustained which is useful in a bright day time scene but at that the price of three grands, that's became difficult to justify (especially combined with the inherent weakenss of IPS as HDR display.) Mini-LED and OLED TV are set to be widely available in 43 inch this year (some already did), at that size, it's highly relevant as a monitor. If you can use an ultrawide, you can use a 43 inches, 

 

Rting list the real brightness scene of QN90B at 1000 nit which mean in practical term, the different between it and the PG32UQX is a lot closer in all HDR brightness, and it would have a far suprior performance in dark scene where you will have to dim down the whole screen brightness to archieve a deeper black. But in any case, I am not arguing whether it's a suprior or worse option, for 1200 vs 3000 grands price tag, it's the only option that's reasonably available to an actual customers.

 

The point I am trying to make is that both LED and LCD has its own limitation, and the images of QN90B vs C2 comparison should be a valid comparison between the two technology. It may not be a complete apple to apple with PG32UQX which is IPS and have differnet brightness tracking but overall points should still stand. If there's a blooming in dark scene from QN90B which can archieve 1:19,000 contrast at 100 nits, it would have been worst with IPS that can only do 1:1000 at 100 nits, if there are dark details losses or blown out dark to bring out those in VA then it would have been worse in IPS (but granted PG32UQX could have preserved better details thanks to its higher local dimming zone counts), the one scene where there could be a different is a bright day time scene (even so, I doubt a lot content are master at full screen 1000 nit, that would be like staring into the sun and it could have caused clipping and colour volume issue) 

[xg32]

On 6/25/2022 at 5:11 PM, BS_ArtStuff said:

.

did some additional digging as i'm very close to pulling the trigger on the qd-oled

 

even in this hub video the flicking can be seen at normal speeds, now i don't see it in the reviews of the monitor so it's a very small portion of people that gets bothered by it

 

 

as for the other specs it's mainly a comparison to the pg35vq since we are sticking to uw (not gonna be getting that one as i just wanna see the qd-oled in person)

 

hdr, depends if you want no blooming or higher peak brightness

text clarity, using this as a main monitor for work etc then the pg35vq wins hands down, the qd-oled is quite bad in this regard.

color gamut, 95% argb 99% p3 on qd-oled vs 90% dci-p3 on the pg35vq. 4k hdr monitors have higher coverage at the cost of refresh rate and response time

The PG35VQ will have more fans in the back, not really concerned with the noice but the chances of failure is higher, overall not a huge concern

At the end of the day if you do notice the flickering during normal usage it is a deal breaker. Samsung is known to cut corners so who knows how long it lasts and what other problems can show up

 

 

[MonitorFlicker]

On 6/27/2022 at 12:41 AM, e22big said:

Umn.. why? PG32UQX can't even reach 2000 nit in any windows size, if anything a 2000 or 4000 nits mastered content will hurt it a bit more than one that master at 1000 nits.

 

It's biggest strenght is the ability to display 1000 nit sustained which is useful in a bright day time scene but at that the price of three grands, that's became difficult to justify (especially combined with the inherent weakenss of IPS as HDR display.) Mini-LED and OLED TV are set to be widely available in 43 inch this year (some already did), at that size, it's highly relevant as a monitor. If you can use an ultrawide, you can use a 43 inches, 

 

Rting list the real brightness scene of QN90B at 1000 nit which mean in practical term, the different between it and the PG32UQX is a lot closer in all HDR brightness, and it would have a far suprior performance in dark scene where you will have to dim down the whole screen brightness to archieve a deeper black. But in any case, I am not arguing whether it's a suprior or worse option, for 1200 vs 3000 grands price tag, it's the only option that's reasonably available to an actual customers.

 

The point I am trying to make is that both LED and LCD has its own limitation, and the images of QN90B vs C2 comparison should be a valid comparison between the two technology. It may not be a complete apple to apple with PG32UQX which is IPS and have differnet brightness tracking but overall points should still stand. If there's a blooming in dark scene from QN90B which can archieve 1:19,000 contrast at 100 nits, it would have been worst with IPS that can only do 1:1000 at 100 nits, if there are dark details losses or blown out dark to bring out those in VA then it would have been worse in IPS (but granted PG32UQX could have preserved better details thanks to its higher local dimming zone counts), the one scene where there could be a different is a bright day time scene (even so, I doubt a lot content are master at full screen 1000 nit, that would be like staring into the sun and it could have caused clipping and colour volume issue) 

Monitors have a smaller size, higher refresh rate, and lower input lag.

The high price is because the 32'' monitors are harder to make than TVs. 

Using a monitor is not the same as watching a TV. TV is for consumers only. Competitive gaming mostly happens on monitors. Professionals use monitors exclusively. 

HDR includes color, brightness, and contrast. 

VA lacks color, it looks more washed out. OLED lacks brightness, it looks much dimmer. IPS covers most color space in Rec2020. With FALD the contrast is solved. The thing left, which is blooming, is to increase the zones. That is why IPS is the most suitable for an HDR display.

The higher price is because sustained brightness is important. It's the key to display accurate HDR. That's why PA32UCG, which I use for work, has sustained 1600nits full-field to display accurately.

Samsung LEDs have problems. The LEDs are not efficient. Samsung doesn't even care about thermal solutions. 

 

Download and check the HDR photo in Windows HDR mode with the default Photo app. Except for aggressive ABL or tone mapping, QN90B cannot even display the details of the 1000+ nits cloud in Forza Horizon in a high APL scene. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cn72CyRg5MbDRURU-YQRx84i0yfMAbux/view?usp=sharing