Alienware AW3926QW Glossy 39" 5K2K 165Hz w/ RGB Stripe

ZeqOBpf6 said:

<.....>

I tried 330hz mode. I still can't tell the difference above 120. on ufotest I can make out 165 vs 330 at certain speeds, barely, but toggling max fps to 120 or 330 in cs2 I can't tell at all. CS2 in 4k ultrawide though, now that's something.

<....>

Click to expand...

You'd have to be feeding it 300fps+, but the ufotest should max it out, yes. Higher fpsHz rates cut the sample-and-hold blur by half every time the fpsHz doubles (and it increases the motion definition.. "dots per dotted line curve shape" motion articulation, animation action states shown, appreciably to at least 500fpsHz). The sample and hold blur reduction by half compared to 165hz should be appreciable when moving your FoV around in a game at speed, where the whole game world is blurring.




Considering DLSS5, path tracing/ray tracing in games' stress on gpus at high resolutions like 4k or higher, 165fpsHz peak is probably fine, even 120fpsHz is for a lot of games. Personally I have no interest in low rez tradeoff for higher than 120 - 165 hz on screens, or screens with lower PQ traded off for one trait (like a curve, or pulsar, or whatever it might be).

Sycraft said:

<....> maybe frame gen depending on the title.

Click to expand...

You might have meant that as in "you might find increased input lag suffered from using framgen more acceptable in single player story based games", not sure. However, taken as "the actual amount of input lag from frame gen may vary depending on the title" also sounds accurate from what I've been seeing and reading. The actual amount of increased input lag hit also varies not just by title, but most critically by what your base frame rate is you are feeding framegen with (the higher the better) and that can also vary, what fps base you are getting, depending on the game title. There are a lot of options, including disabling path tracing if willing to (or are forced to due to your screen's rez), because that is a huge hit on your base frame rate.

.

Sycraft said:

There is, but you'd have to use more intense DLSS settings in some games and consider framegen. Something like this, even with high end cards, if very often going to be a "needs DLSS performance" kind of affair.

The higher rez a monitor gets, the harder you'll have to lean in to upscaling. We just can't brute force this shit, we are already pushing GPUs to insane levels, it isn't like we are suddenly going to have ones that can handle super high rez and high FPS native.

So, DLSS performance, possibly even ultra performance, but I'd stick with performance and then maybe frame gen depending on the title.

Click to expand...

It's also possible to run at 4K instead of 5K2K in games where you want higher frame rates. I find that the wider image doesn't add much to the experience with fast-moving games like shooters. My attention is focused in the middle anyway. I don't really notice what's going on at the edges. The 32" 4K experience is fine, and you can get it with this monitor.

Azzkiker said:

This monitor is very tempting, but I really enjoy getting 100+ frames and very high quality settings.

Is there any hope to game at 90-100fps on this thing with a lowly 4090 using DLSS? If not, I'd rather have the 34".

Click to expand...

4090 still such a beast. Was messing with things and with 5k2k DLSS performance looked much better than when I ran the AW3423DW 3440x1440 DLAA. Tried to run both as duplicated while gaming however you are limited to the lower in-game resolution (each monitor runs native resolution still). In which case, was pleasantly surprised how the 5k2k rendered 3440x1440 games. There is a hint of softness and distant objects lose clarity but it still works.

What the Dell?

I tried to order one. It said it would be delivered the 17th, right up until it didn't ship by the night of the 16th and I got a notice it was delayed until the 25th; but you can still buy one for delivery on the 19th?