Any gaming monitor needs:

1440p+

27in+

120hz+

Gsync / freesync

Those are the minimum. Hedgy has spoken!

low resolution, high framerate...I'd wait for the higher resolution for professional gaming or go with a Samsung or LG with a higher res.

1080p

for

£599?

Also SCAN have this in their today-only section for £593.99 but if you don't get free shipping like I do (Hexus forum perk) that it can come out as more than this deal.

https://www.scan.co.uk/todayonly

10-bit panel would be even better, but those aren't out for the consumer yet. But then I doubt most people would notice the difference, so it's not as nice a priority. 10-bit video is already out though, and I have some 10-bit capture equipment, not that I'll ever use the 10-bit functionality. If you download anime though, most of it is now 10-bit because that extra colour information allows for much better compression at better picture quality.

Sorry, I rambled. But yeah, 8bit > 6bit. gradient dithering is so annoying on my current panels.

LinusTechTips did videos on the question of "Why is there always some sacrifice when it comes to these monitors", they always fail one or more items on the checklist for the killer screen which you would expect at this price point.

I'm the opposite.

As an owner of a curved ultrawide they are totally NOT worth the extra money over a flat ultrawide. Save £200.

Liking the PG348Q

Read the review on tftcentral then decide.

VA panel has 9ms response time compared to IPS 4-5ms and TN 1-2ms.
ULMB (low motion blur backlight strobing) not available over 120Hz
G-Sync and ULMB do not work together. One or the other.

200Mhz is marketing guff.

I have a PG279Q which I got for £550 new on ebay (probably been RMA'd) the 21:9 variant is £900 from acer or £1000 from Asus...............cray

So would I :smiley: the comparison was FHD compared to 2160P...
but the price premium of a 21/9 1440p over a 16/9 1440p is not worth it. You can pick up a 1440p for £200, cheapest 1440p UW is £500 pritty much

YOU ARE PAYING FOR THE CUUUUUURRRVE.

uh... the AOC C3583FQ is approx. #50 GBP cheaper (from same seller, amazon.co.uk). But even then, i would still say wait for the new AGON series to come out. They are planning to release at least 1 new ultrawide model in coming weeks / months too. (total of 10 new monitors in AGON series).

Its still 1080p vertically though so will look the same as a 1080p monitor only wider. Yer 34' 21:9 is the same height as a 27' 16:9 monitor.

4k/60 needs same power as 3440x1440 at 100hz. I'd take 1440p ultrawide at 100hz over 4k/60 any day.

a few things i dont think any of the comments have mentioned...
1. size is measured diagonally. so an ultrawide screen would have a much higher size in "inches" because its longer from corner to corner. but it wont actually be much taller.

2. its a WIDER screen. the res is 2560. that IS higher than the standard "1080p" resolution people talk about (around 600 pixels more wide)

3. 4k resolutions on a smaller screen is actually a bad thing. this isnt a phone. back jn my pro quake 2 days i had an awesome big crt but it was common to play at only 800x600 or even lower if you were serious. then again back then my tnt2 ultra was awesome with its 32mb ram on board.

I'd rather have the video card that's running the 4k monitor at 60hz than the 1080p thingy!

couldn't disagree more
I'd rather play 1080p @ 144hz than 4k @ 60hz

High framerate is what you need for pro counter strike, not high resolution. Same probably applies to a number of other games. 200Hz is mental.

How many reps can you do with it though? :stuck_out_tongue:

Indeed... though the Panasonic CX700 works superbly as a monitor :sunglasses:

You mean 'on my tv'. Not a monitor.

Whoops, thought this was 3440x1440.....

£600 is wayyyy too much :confused:

In the reviews it states that, it doesn't work so well above 144hz anyway....
TFT central have a thorough review of this and on youtube

a 1760p would be more desirable at this size, not that there is a res of 1760p, but if there were, that would sa-weet.
The trickle down effect would mean that this kinda monitor would be available for £450ish in 1-2 years.... but I suppose they'll have OLED screens and HDR stuff then to......

ITS HOW THEY GET YOU :neutral_face:

I'll get the art dept on it straight away? A few questions first...

Should it have a semi naked female in armour or lycra?
Does her 'special sword' need to be 3 ot 4 times her body size?
Should her breasts be anatomically accurate or 7x her head size?
Are jokey references to urination still what gamers want?

SOLD me on that one, I want to order one, get down to Dragon's Den and get it done son!

I would love get get my hands on one of those monitors!

NOTE: this isn't a gaming monitor as it's name isn't stupid enough.

If it was the : Ultra **** master turbo hyper pleb monkey strix OC gibbon chicken edition. It would be.

dont forget a 1080gtx :wink:

Easy to reach 200FPS at 1080p... Just lower the quality...

But in all seriousness, your point contradicts itself. It's a 200Hz monitor and no one can reach that high an FPS really, so that isn't the selling point for most, it's the resolution, and it just doesn't match the price tag.

If this was 1440p I'd be buying it right now. It's ridiculous that the X34 is £300+ more expensive now :/

people complaining over 2560x1080 what the ****???

most people don't get why it costs 600 pounds, its a 200hz monitor... most people here cant even reach 200fps in games in 1080p let alone 1440p and want to have a higher resolution ahah makes me laugh..

Would love a screen with a high refresh rate but playing Doom on a 50" 4K is incredible (albeit at 60Hz).

1080 bit low for size. should at least be 1440 tho beast of a screen still

It's a funny shape and a high refresh. Very niche market means that the usual economies of scale don't necessarily apply.

Remember the old HUKD rule of thumb: not good value for me does not mean not good value for anyone, anywhere.

Get a 144hz 1080p to tide you over for about £130-180..

Then get a 1440p version of this next year for this price

the LG looks better. But not for this price. Hot.

Because we were using 1600 x 1200 monitors over 20 years ago. For £600 this is a joke.

I have used this monitor and the resolution is just too low.

Because it is still 1080p but ultra widescreen.

Why is everyone complaining about the resolution? Its 2560 x 1080 pixels and 200hz :confused:

Any gaming monitor needs:

1440p+

27in+

120hz+

Gsync / freesync

Those are the minimum. Hedgy has spoken!

I wish they made tellies this size!

Take my money!

Yep thats what put me off. The X34 is a better resolution but it's yet another couple of hundred more on top of this price. Plus you need to add on the cost of some serious graphics cards to power it too.

1080p

for

£599?

I saw ACER - and I just cannot risk my money! thank you my good sir!

I have my current 27" BenQ, but I am very, VERY tempted, I am itching. I am so used to gaming at 1080p though and NEED to play above 60FPS and since this is a 35", surely it makes no sense, it's too big?

Don't understand which market segment they are targeting. Full HD on 34 inch? Such a low ppi on top of that high price.if shouldn't be more than 400£ price bracket

Hrmm this or an HTC vive... In my dreams

low resolution, high framerate...I'd wait for the higher resolution for professional gaming or go with a Samsung or LG with a higher res.

Shame I can't justify the cost, but I really want!

Actually just shouted "Want!" :disappointed: