I wish I could get any gpu that is SEP/MSRP amount in the past 2+ years ^.^
barebone card, they get at a discount, slap on a cooler (cost them maybe $20 tops) add the box and manuals etc (maybe another $30 to plop on shelf) they seem to average somewhere in the range of 40-60% markup (profit) and the sellers themselves are in the range of some 20-40% on top of that (especially when they throw excuse out of "miners" buy them as fast as we bring them in so no choice we have to slap extra cost on them)
144Hz at 1440p is not "that hard" but I suppose if you mean every game out there jacked up the best possible settings you can throw at it, that is pushing it because not even the "mighty" 1080Ti can accomplish this 100% of the time, forget the 4k at 60+ FPS that so many review sites state is "no problem" BS on that ^.^
I often get above 60fps at 2160p on a measly 1070. All about lowering settings that are very hard to see. I actually find 1440p144hz to be much harder to run than 4k60. 4k144hz is gonna be rough, but even a 1080 ti can already do that in many titles.
I almost do not understand the point at all of curved monitors, all the ones I have seen are really no better then "flat" ones if anything you pretty much have to sit dead center of them for it to really have much "impact" (if you want to use that word)
I personally do not find them able to draw you in or anything along those lines, I do however find that when you say lean a touch to left or right it totally disrupts the "smoothness" of whatever is on the screen..they seem to be more difficult to make and therefore at least a chunk more pricey..even more so when you get Ngrredy sink...err..G-Sync instead of Freesync added to it.
not too shabby a price (seems to me) and nice low enough running watts (I wish makers would test worst case scenario for every product so that one knows it they "reduce" in this case brightness or whatever consumption is that much lower)
$300 CAD (basically) is a td much for a 1080p 24" monitor IMO, but I suppose if the picture quality is "there" then it is quite reasonable,
The notional advantage is that with your head properly centered all parts of the screen are an equal distance from your eyes, making the angular size of stuff seen on the edges the same size as that in the center vs smaller because it's farther away on a flat screen.
I don't have a curved monitor, but do angle the side panels of my multi-screen setup to achieve similar results.
And notional disadvantage is that the picture rendered is computed for flat projection and not a curved one... so with curved screen the image is in fact not representing what it should have.
It seems odd to put a curve on a 24" 1080p panel. There isn't much to the left or right of your head-on field of view that makes it beneficial. On wider and larger panels, it makes more sense.
Will the higher-resolution model be able to get away with HDMI 1.4? Not only is only able to do 144Hz WQHD at 4:2:0, it only comes with the earlier version of HDCP as well - limited to Full HD? Still, this is what their IPS version did, so maybe they're just going to tell people to use DP for that. https://www.anandtech.com/show/13095/aoc-launches-...
Also odd that the 27" is 23W while the 31.5" of the same resolution is 50W, purportedly at the same brightness. I could see it if it had an integrated hub and the other didn't, but otherwise...
That big a jump makes me wonder if the 31.5" is using an old CFL backlight instead of LEDs to save cost. Based on area I'd expect to be about 33% higher. At that point it's 31W expected vs 50W actual which isn't completely out of line for the spread in backlight techs.
OTOH the brightness level for both of 250cd/m^2 is listed as 'typical' not peak on AOC's site, if the bigger one has a higher peak and the power numbers are maximum not typical levels that could also explain it.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
17 Comments
Back to Article
freeskier93 - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link
If the Freesync range is 30-144Hz then I'm sold.eek2121 - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link
Wish we could get some ultrawide IPS monitors with a resolution of 5120x1440.HotBBQ - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link
Wish I could get a $350 GPU that could play games at 144Hz @ 2560x1440.Dragonstongue - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link
I wish I could get any gpu that is SEP/MSRP amount in the past 2+ years ^.^barebone card, they get at a discount, slap on a cooler (cost them maybe $20 tops) add the box and manuals etc (maybe another $30 to plop on shelf) they seem to average somewhere in the range of 40-60% markup (profit) and the sellers themselves are in the range of some 20-40% on top of that (especially when they throw excuse out of "miners" buy them as fast as we bring them in so no choice we have to slap extra cost on them)
144Hz at 1440p is not "that hard" but I suppose if you mean every game out there jacked up the best possible settings you can throw at it, that is pushing it because not even the "mighty" 1080Ti can accomplish this 100% of the time, forget the 4k at 60+ FPS that so many review sites state is "no problem" BS on that ^.^
xTRICKYxx - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
I often get above 60fps at 2160p on a measly 1070. All about lowering settings that are very hard to see. I actually find 1440p144hz to be much harder to run than 4k60. 4k144hz is gonna be rough, but even a 1080 ti can already do that in many titles.Dragonstongue - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link
I almost do not understand the point at all of curved monitors, all the ones I have seen are really no better then "flat" ones if anything you pretty much have to sit dead center of them for it to really have much "impact" (if you want to use that word)I personally do not find them able to draw you in or anything along those lines, I do however find that when you say lean a touch to left or right it totally disrupts the "smoothness" of whatever is on the screen..they seem to be more difficult to make and therefore at least a chunk more pricey..even more so when you get Ngrredy sink...err..G-Sync instead of Freesync added to it.
not too shabby a price (seems to me) and nice low enough running watts (I wish makers would test worst case scenario for every product so that one knows it they "reduce" in this case brightness or whatever consumption is that much lower)
$300 CAD (basically) is a td much for a 1080p 24" monitor IMO, but I suppose if the picture quality is "there" then it is quite reasonable,
imaheadcase - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
I don't get the point of flat monitors anymore, why bother with them when curved ones offer better viewing. I would never go back to flat panels.jimbo2779 - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
How are curved screens better? I haven't spent much time with them but the premise of them just seems like a gimmick to me.DanNeely - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
The notional advantage is that with your head properly centered all parts of the screen are an equal distance from your eyes, making the angular size of stuff seen on the edges the same size as that in the center vs smaller because it's farther away on a flat screen.I don't have a curved monitor, but do angle the side panels of my multi-screen setup to achieve similar results.
HollyDOL - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
And notional disadvantage is that the picture rendered is computed for flat projection and not a curved one... so with curved screen the image is in fact not representing what it should have.Lord of the Bored - Sunday, September 16, 2018 - link
I almost don't get the point of MONITORS anymore. VR headsets you can read in are right around the corner.PeachNCream - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
It seems odd to put a curve on a 24" 1080p panel. There isn't much to the left or right of your head-on field of view that makes it beneficial. On wider and larger panels, it makes more sense.TheJian - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
You lost me at 16:9.GreenReaper - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
Will the higher-resolution model be able to get away with HDMI 1.4? Not only is only able to do 144Hz WQHD at 4:2:0, it only comes with the earlier version of HDCP as well - limited to Full HD? Still, this is what their IPS version did, so maybe they're just going to tell people to use DP for that.https://www.anandtech.com/show/13095/aoc-launches-...
Also odd that the 27" is 23W while the 31.5" of the same resolution is 50W, purportedly at the same brightness. I could see it if it had an integrated hub and the other didn't, but otherwise...
DanNeely - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
That big a jump makes me wonder if the 31.5" is using an old CFL backlight instead of LEDs to save cost. Based on area I'd expect to be about 33% higher. At that point it's 31W expected vs 50W actual which isn't completely out of line for the spread in backlight techs.OTOH the brightness level for both of 250cd/m^2 is listed as 'typical' not peak on AOC's site, if the bigger one has a higher peak and the power numbers are maximum not typical levels that could also explain it.
spe1491 - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link
Needs an ultrawide model, then I'd be very interested.laychi - Monday, January 21, 2019 - link
Is the 1ms response time works when freesync on?