Alienware AW3418DW 34" Ultrawide

B

Bladestorm

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
1,232
Dell is now taking orders for the AW3418DW, and at $1,500 is pretty steep. However, since Acer seems to have abandoned the X34P, this one is the next best thing. I've heard Dell is much better when it comes to back light bleed compared to Acer and Asus. Is there any truth to this? If so, I'll place the order. Otherwise I'll wait for Acer and Asus's version using the same panel, and hopefully cheaper.
 
What makes it $300 better than the Asus PG348Q? 120hz overclockability? eh. It seems hard to justify paying $1500 for this now when the Asus PG35VQ will likely be out in <6 months and probably cost $2000ish.

Maybe like most Dell products, it's priced assuming you are getting 15-20% off on coupons and stuff.
 
I'm sure the Alienware/Dell quality is pretty good, but $1500 for basically the same monitor as the X34 from two years ago is a bit crazy. The panel isn't quick enough to notice a huge difference between 100 and 120 Hz. I'd wait for the new DP 1.4 G-Sync monitors to come out.
 
I don't think they are calling it "G-Sync 2", but yes there is a new Displayport 1.4 module coming out for much higher bandwidth and HDR in 2018. I wouldn't buy anything with the old G_Sync chip in it.
 
Morkai said:
I think they simply call the new module "g-sync hdr" (dp1.4, backlight-zone-controller etc)
https://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-g-sync-hdr-announced-at-ces-2017
https://images.nvidia.com/content/gsync/pdf/g-sync-hdr-whitepaper.pdf
Click to expand...

Where does it say the G-Sync chip is different? The new HDR panel spec requires a GPU and monitor that supports DP1.4, where does it say the G-Sync chip had to be redesigned? The module only adjusts the Vblank timing on the panel. G-Sync has nothing to do with the quality of the frames being sent by the GPU or res/quality the monitor can display. Thus all the module/chip is the same from 1080P-4k and VA or IPS. Changing the version of the DP won't change what the G-Sync module can do or how it does it.

Even the white paper, unless I misread a line, only talks about the panels ability and the need for DP1.4. Nothing is said about a new G-Sync module being created. G-Sync HDR refers to the panel's classification/ability, not the module installed.
 
Cr4ckm0nk3y said:
The module only adjusts the Vblank timing on the panel.
Click to expand...

??? The g-sync module is a whole board with embedded fpga cpu and ram and it completely replaces the normal image processor and scaler that would be on a monitor. It's not some little add-in piece. Current g-sync modules don't support DP 1.4, it's not surprising that they need to redesign it and it also wouldn't surprise me if the entire backlight control for the HDR monitors is also part of the new module.
 
Sancus said:
??? The g-sync module is a whole board with embedded fpga cpu and ram and it completely replaces the normal image processor and scaler that would be on a monitor. It's not some little add-in piece. Current g-sync modules don't support DP 1.4, it's not surprising that they need to redesign it and it also wouldn't surprise me if the entire backlight control for the HDR monitors is also part of the new module.
Click to expand...

The G-Sync is a separate module board that plugs into the monitors main PCB. Yes the G-Sync module includes the FPGA chip and ram but it is a small module board. Some manufacturers have decided to embedded it, but the module was called a module for a reason. It is a "little add-in piece."

Here is the module from a PG279Q . My 1st gen X34 had the same module.

IMG_8588_zpsaxgleeld.png


Self install module/PCB from a PG248
DSC01237_zpsvlmnpgde.jpg


The module replaces the scalar. I have never seen a image processor or ram in a consumer/gaming monitor so there is nothing to replace. The module does not process the images. The main PCB has a microcontroller for brightness, color, sharpness, OSD, HDR, etc but that is manufacturer and panel specific. Not on the G-Sync module. The G-Sync module is solely used to...sync the images. It doesn't handle any of the other aspects.

As I previously said the module uses the monitors Vblank to keep the frames in sync.

With regard to RAM, "a G-Sync board contains 768MB of DDR3 memory, which stores the previous frame so that it can be compared to the next incoming frame. It does this to decrease input lag." The RAM is not used for any kind of "processing" from a video processor or any rendering. It is a holding area for the frame to sync it properly.

The only reason the module has been using DP1.2 is that was the standard at the time. It allowed for faster refresh (greater than 60hz) at given resolutions compared to HDMI. The module doesn't give a shit what display input it receives frames from. Theoretically the module could support any input. Thus the ease of using eDP for laptops. It was limited initially to DP1.2, again, for higher res/refresh. Most monitor manufacturers skipped DP1.3 so the module skipped it.

If you have a white paper or anything else that says the module was completely redesigned for DP1.4 and HDR I would love to read it.
 
Whether the chip or module itself has been redesigned is fairly irrelevant. The important aspect is that it is mated with a DP 1.4 TCon to allow the much faster bandwidth. This Alienware is basically no different than what has been sold for years now.
 
Unless the g-sync module can't keep up, then it won't need to be redesigned. That's the beauty of an FPGA chip. Nvidia/vendors only need to reprogram the chip with the new/added set of functionality. All logic in a FPGA design is written in a Hardware Description Language. In theory, G-Sync Version 2 could literally be a software update. There are *some* hardware constraints, of course, such as the number of LUTs a particular FPGA module contains. Also keep in mind that FPGAs are not exactly clocked anywhere near their fixed-function hardware equivalents.

Again, the notion of "hardware re-use" assumes that the module itself can keep up. The i/o ports might need something entirely new (not enough wires) or the signal timings could be so tight that the FPGA chip itself might not be able to keep up. You don't go with an FPGA design because your primary requirement was speed. While there's a lot of flexibility with Nvidia going with this design, I think it is still probably going to be limited in some way at the i/o ports. A DP1.4 or HDR requirement could potentially be something that they didn't anticipate, thus existing outside the physical constraint.

Also, Nvidia's business strategy might not be to give out free "software updates." Nvidia's business model could very well be to charge more for new/added functionality. That puts the ball in the OEM's court.
 
In theory they could upgrade to 1.4 with an FPGA update. It would require the tranceivers (IO pins) and the internal logic to be able to handle the faster speeds. Also assume they have a way to update the FPGA image via DP, not really a given. I think we'd only need it for 4K with refresh over 60Hz anyhow. Still wish NV would support freesync (DP 1.4 has it in the spec, no AMD code or API required) and allow us to ditch the g-sync module and have a much larger and cheaper monitor selection.
 
OP, did you say something about the X34 not being made by Acer? I have one, and have to say, it is the best monitor I have ever had. Thats a shame if they don't have something good to replace it.
 
p_monks33 said:
OP, did you say something about the X34 not being made by Acer? I have one, and have to say, it is the best monitor I have ever had. Thats a shame if they don't have something good to replace it.
Click to expand...

I said that the the X34's replacement, the X34P, seems to have been cancelled.
 
Archaea said:
What's the Alienware have that the other $1000 34 and 35" gsync ultrawide monitors don't?
Click to expand...

120hz refresh out of box, as opposed to overclocked 100, which may or may not reach, and may or may not have problems with.

Edit: actually, it's 100hz native, 120hz overclocked, still.
 
Last edited:
Archaea said:
What's the Alienware have that the other $1000 34 and 35" gsync ultrawide monitors don't?
Click to expand...

The Dell is also on sale for $999 now. Dell warranty is far better than other companies when it comes to monitor. They let you exchange for light bleed, even 1 dead pixel, and advance exchange in which a replacement is sent out prior to you returning the old/defective monitor. I have bought many monitors from Dell and had to exchange the U3011 3 times for light bleed or dead pixels and it went well without issues.

Just ordered the Alienware monitor now.
 
hv43082 said:
The Dell is also on sale for $999 now. Dell warranty is far better than other companies when it comes to monitor. They let you exchange for light bleed, even 1 dead pixel, and advance exchange in which a replacement is sent out prior to you returning the old/defective monitor. I have bought many monitors from Dell and had to exchange the U3011 3 times for light bleed or dead pixels and it went well without issues.

Just ordered the Alienware monitor now.
Click to expand...


Same here. I almost pulled the trigger last week at $1250 from another retailer, but glad I waited. Don't expect to see it cheaper anytime soon.
 
Got mine two days ago and love it. This is my first experience with an ultrawide, and I won't be going back to 16:9 anytime soon. I was a little concerned coming from my XB270HU, but the slight increase in response time isn't noticeable to me, and I'm pretty perceptive.
 
I jumped on the deal as well. I love Dell's QC and their warranties. This will be my first time using an ultrawide! I don't care much about HDR until it becomes the norm every 2 out of 3 games released has HDR support.

This is a no-brainer for anyone looking to get an ultrawide 3440x1440 IPS G-Sync monitor at this price.
 
This is very tempting. I have the Samsung ku6300 40" 4k which I like very much. I really like the immersion from the 40" screen at 4k res. Obviously 120hz and gsync is a different world and I've been wanting to dive in but I'm wondering if I'm gonna miss that extra 6" and 4k res. Or will the 21:9 aspect ratio and buttery smooth gsync and 120hz motion more than make up for that loss? Input greatly appreciated guys.

I was going to wait till next year's releases of 4k offerings and see what was what. Makes sense to wait or what?

Dam 999 is tempting.
 
Savoy said:
I was going to wait till next year's releases of 4k offerings and see what was what. Makes sense to wait or what?
Click to expand...
Many people are waiting for the 27" AHVA 4k 144hz G-Sync HDR displays from Asus and Acer. Who knows when they'll be released and what issues they might have with the first few batches. You'll be waiting an awfully long while. Then the cycle repeats for new monitors announced after that and you end up waiting another year.

The problem is the AW3418DW sales promotion is a limited time offer according to a Reddit user who talked to a Dell rep. I wouldn't be surprised if the promotion ended after this weekend. It's anyones guess when the next sale on it is.

As for 4k TVs, well TV is a TV. There is not much to say anything about it when it comes to games besides input lag.
 
Savoy - it'll be a LOT less than the 6" you are thinking and yes you'll miss it.

34" widescreens are the equivalent of 27" vertical height 16:9 monitors.
The 34" is a diagonal measurement - but because it's wide 21:9 aspect that diagonal doesn't mean what you think it means --- you'll end up mising a lot of height. It's literally the same height as a 27" 16:9 monitor. You have a 40". Going from 40" to 27" will just seem like suck, and I'm not even sure the extra width will be wider than what you have currently.
I went form a 30" Dell 3014 (16:9) to a 35" Acer ultrawides screen (21:9) and felt I was giving up too much vertical height.

If you had a 27" now you'd love the extra width, but a 40" is huge.

if you consider a 38" ultrawide monitor you'll have the vertical height of a 30" 16:9 - which might be a bit more palatable. You might be looking for a ultrawide 43" (21:9) (if and when they come out, to not sacrifice too much on height compared to what you are used to -- though even a 43" ultrawide would still sacrifice a bit of vertical space compared to a 40" 16:9.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Savoy
like this
You two both make sense. Ack now in back to thinking it's not the best move at this time. See I've never gamed on a 120hz screen so it's one of those things where I don't miss what I've never experienced. I really like the overall size of my current panel and yes it's a TV but since there's no 4k high Hz gaming equalivalent at that size I decided to wait and see if anything comes down the road. Now this deal pops up and it got me thinking again. I have my daughter's gaming PC in my computer room and she has my old Korean 27" 1440 ips panel which is still kicking overclocked to 100hz and so I'm very familiar with the height of a1440p 27" screen. Even though I used to use that screen at 100hz I know that was never a real 100hz line the screens are now. Ugh don't know what to do now.
 
Man, I hope the light bleed is minimal. Picked up the Asus PG348Q a while back and the light bleed is brutal. Needless to say I returned it and stuck with the LG 34 in until something better comes out such as this Alienware monitor.
 
Archaea said:
Savoy - it'll be a LOT less than the 6" you are thinking and yes you'll miss it.

34" widescreens are the equivalent of 27" vertical height 16:9 monitors.
The 34" is a diagonal measurement - but because it's wide 21:9 aspect that diagonal doesn't mean what you think it means --- you'll end up mising a lot of height. It's literally the same height as a 27" 16:9 monitor. You have a 40". Going from 40" to 27" will just seem like suck, and I'm not even sure the extra width will be wider than what you have currently.
I went form a 30" Dell 3014 (16:9) to a 35" Acer ultrawides screen (21:9) and felt I was giving up too much vertical resolution.

if you consider a 38" ultrawide monitor you'll have the vertical height of a 30" 16:9.
Click to expand...


I do much of my gaming on a 65" Samsung KS8000 @ 4k 60hz, but I wanted to have a more immersive setup for FPS's on my desk.

The KS8000 is in the other room, necessitates wireless keyboard and mouse, or controller. Great for most games, and while Destiny 2 looks great at 4k with HDR, there's definitely a lack of frame smoothnesss when doing competitive play.

Even with my current 27" 1440p clocked at 105hz (QNIX QX2710 from a few years ago), I can see a huge difference in high speed FPS gaming with lots of turns etc. So that's the main reason I opted for the AW display. Wanting something reasonably high refresh, that's responsive, and immersive for the types of games that really benefit from that, but unwilling to go back from IPS after switching. I've become pretty sensitive to viewing angle discrepancy, and cannot handle any lack of text clarity.


I'll still probably do much of my gaming in the other room on the bigger screen, although in fairness, size is very relative to distance.
 
Thing is I really wanted the Acer or the Asus variant of this panel when they first dropped. I followed the long threads in this sub etc. I missed out on the in stock/out of stock bullshit that went on the first few months plus I was never happy with what they were charging. Never sat well with me so after a few months passed I decided to pass and wait. Then last year that amazing deal for the Samsung ku6300 popped and for 350 I said this thing has to be worth a shot for big screen 4k gaming and honestly it's been great. I do however want and always have liked that precise lower input lag and smooth motion of high Hz since I'm mainly a fps gamer. Again the 40"is nice since I have nothing to directly compare it to so I don't know what I'm missing. Albeit I know this 34" from a performance aspect blows it away. I just don't know it's after getting used to 40" 4k 2 feet in front of me if I can get used to having a much narrower viewport in front of me. The TV I have now is amazing in that you're in the game. It totally guild you're peripheral vision and I love it. That said I would really like the smooth motion and precise mouse feel back too from a real monitor. Not to mention ips looks pretty dam good imo.
 
I'm glad Dell is pushing a little bit- but I'm waiting for 32-34", 4k120, with HDR.

I feel like I'm going to be waiting awhile, as apparently 27" is somehow a priority here.
 
Vega are you still using that Omen 35?

Are you still of the opinion that’s one of the strongest options currently available.
Vega said:
Ya the real deal will be the 32" 4K 144 Hz HDR G-Sync FALD coming out ~Q4 2018. A year is a long time to wait!
Click to expand...
 
The Omen is great for slower paced games. The VA black smear on any VA gets to me though. Right now for PUBG I wanted something with really fast pixels in G-Sync mode so using the PG278QR.

I'll probably get the 27 4K FALD coming out Q1 to see how they get on.
 
So it seems my daughter's monitor is slowly dieing and I need to replace that soon. She's using my old Korean 27" 1440p at 100hz ips. What's the best logical choice to replace that without spending a ton. Obviously I want at least 120/144hz and gsync. Preferably ips but MCA wouldn't be out of the question. Trying to avoid tn. Any suggestions guys?
 
I'd rather have a 32" 4K that can do 100+Hz and HDR but I don't expect to see those for at least another year, maybe more baseed on the delays we've been seeing recently. Might have non-organic LED panels that far out. Also likely need more GPU (have a 1080 Ti) to get the really fast refresh on a 4K anyhow.

I've have good luck with Dell monitors, still have my first 16:10 from 2001 or so kicking around and it still works, not that I use it regularly. Hoping this one is just as good and I don't have to play panel roulette like it seems you have to for the Asus and Acer ones.
 
I am done with this current IPS, VA & TN tech. I am long overdue ready for the 144hz 4k FALDs and 120hz 4k OLEDs.

$999 is a good price for what you get....however, I am not going to waste my time buying something that I am going to be selling in 3-6 months.... When I sold my X34 shipping cost was over $100 and Ebay/Paypal fees were another 12%. Re-sale costs have really deterred me from buying and trying things these days, unless its something I know that I will keep for at least a year.
 
I think I could get this for about $875 and still not sure I’d bite over the 37.5” LG.

$75 off with Free Dell Advantage program right now

And

5% off through befrugal referall link at Dell.

Not 100% sure they’d stack, but at least $925. Dell charges tax though so I guess back up to close to $1000.

I just don’t think a ultrawide 34” is worth $1k. I feel like they are still overcharging.
 
It is tempting. I been waiting for a good 3440x1440 monitor that does at least 120Hz and has Gsynch. I have a GTX1080Ti now and the 2560x1080 I have currently is nice but its just a substitute/temporary. My old 3440x1440 died so I been holding out for a replacement. What do you think guys is this the best we are going to see for a while as far as 1440p goes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top