Dell Alienware AW3423DW 34″ QD-OLED 175Hz (3440 x 1440)

Mchart

Mchart

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
5,956
Jumpem said:
Late to the party. This seems to be the only monitor to get if picture quality is your main concern. There are no other QD OLED monitors that I am aware of. There are some with LG panels, but the colors would be lacking in comparison.
Click to expand...
Picture quality of the very few IPS based panels like the X27, etc is better as they have pixel density over this, and they are substantially brighter which is nice to have for brighter HDR scenes. However, I generally prefer this panel for gaming due to the true black of OLED, and the fact that you're going down to 1440 versus 4k which helps frame rates.

If picture quality was my main concern and I was doing professional type work I would not get this monitor. However, I do agree it's the best currently for high hz HDR gaming.
 
J

Jumpem

Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
986
Mchart said:
Picture quality of the very few IPS based panels like the X27, etc is better as they have pixel density over this, and they are substantially brighter which is nice to have for brighter HDR scenes. However, I generally prefer this panel for gaming due to the true black of OLED, and the fact that you're going down to 1440 versus 4k which helps frame rates.

If picture quality was my main concern and I was doing professional type work I would not get this monitor. However, I do agree it's the best currently for high hz HDR gaming.
Click to expand...
IPS panels have terrible picture quality. I have a highly rated IPS gaming monitor and the picture quality is terrible compared to my OLED television.

If you look at a place like rings, IPS panels rank below VA panels, which rank below OLED panels, with QD OLED panels being the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xar
like this
Mchart

Mchart

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
5,956
Jumpem said:
IPS panels have terrible picture quality. I have a highly rated IPS gaming monitor and the picture quality is terrible compared to my OLED television.

If you look at a place like rings, IPS panels rank below VA panels, which rank below OLED panels, with QD OLED panels being the best.
Click to expand...
Depends on the content.

I have said many times - This panel is far better for gaming than my X27. However, the X27 I still keep plugged in for all other productivity work.

There is a reason Apple isn't using OLED for their stand-alone displays. It's micro-led IPS, and believe me - No one doing professional work is using OLED right now. You'd be an idiot to do so.
 
Z

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,730
I've had my AW3423DW for like 2 or 3 months and LOVE it, the OLED vibrant colors cannot be beat, and deep blacks are literally BLACK not dark grey, and smooth fluid motion of the image. Tried the LG C2 42 and it's too large, and the colors were not as vibrant.
 
J

Jumpem

Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
986
Mchart said:
Depends on the content.

I have said many times - This panel is far better for gaming than my X27. However, the X27 I still keep plugged in for all other productivity work.

There is a reason Apple isn't using OLED for their stand-alone displays. It's micro-led IPS, and believe me - No one doing professional work is using OLED right now. You'd be an idiot to do so.
Click to expand...
I think gaming is assumed to be the primary use here.
 
Z

Ziggy_Stardog

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 20, 2021
Messages
101
I was a day 1 adopter. Better brighter picture than my b9 55" and more smooth. I haven't had the same fan sound issue people are talking about, but text definitely has that rainbow effect. Tried that 3rd party "Bettertext" or whatever and it seems to help some, but still very noticeable. Not a huge deal since I'm 95% gaming on it most of the time.
 
Xar

Xar

n00b
Joined
Dec 15, 2022
Messages
44
Jumpem said:
IPS panels have terrible picture quality. I have a highly rated IPS gaming monitor and the picture quality is terrible compared to my OLED television.

If you look at a place like rings, IPS panels rank below VA panels, which rank below OLED panels, with QD OLED panels being the best.
Click to expand...
QD-OLED and WRGB-OLED w/ MLA are way above any Mini-LED and Edge-Lit LCDs in IQ.

2024 Phosphorescent Blue QD-OLED will take lead as the best panel technology until Micro-LED fully established itself in the consumer market.
 
V

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
10,284
Jumpem said:
IPS panels have terrible picture quality. I have a highly rated IPS gaming monitor and the picture quality is terrible compared to my OLED television.

If you look at a place like rings, IPS panels rank below VA panels, which rank below OLED panels, with QD OLED panels being the best.
Click to expand...
I always found VA panels to look the worst.
 
K

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,976
Jumpem said:
IPS panels have terrible picture quality. I have a highly rated IPS gaming monitor and the picture quality is terrible compared to my OLED television.

If you look at a place like rings, IPS panels rank below VA panels, which rank below OLED panels, with QD OLED panels being the best.
Click to expand...
That's way too reductive. Each of these technologies has its tradeoffs.

IPS tends to do well for desktop use as it has decent response time, viewing angles, color accuracy etc but low contrast ratio, IPS glow...
VA has higher contrast ratio but bad viewing angles andmore issues with pixel response times for dark transitions. Samsung has mostly solved the pixel response times in their models.
OLED has per pixel local dimming, excellent viewing angles and response times, but low peak/sustained brightness, pixel structures that don't work well for desktop use and potential for burn in.

Throw mini-LED backlights into the LCDs and results are varied - higher peak/sustained brightness than OLED but often at the expense of pixel response times and blooming due to not having per pixel dimming.

You just pick which compromises are acceptable to you. I won't pay the massive prices for e.g PG32UQX (mini-LED IPS) because its pixel response times suck for how expensive it is, I'm not looking to buy the Samsung Neo G7/G8 because of the issues those models have, I am not interested in QD-OLED because I need a 70% desktop use, 30% gaming display so the pixel structure issues are too much and the resolution is too low. It would be fine as a pure gaming display but I can just use my OLED TV for that.

Personally I don't care too much what technology is used but rather look at these things on a per display model basis. In the past about 8-10 years or something I've gone 30" 2560x1600 60 Hz IPS -> 27" 2560x1440 144 Hz TN -> 49" 5120x1440 120 Hz VA -> 48" 3840x2160 120 Hz OLED -> 28" 3840x2160 144 Hz IPS and am now looking to get a Samsung 57" 7680x2160 240 Hz VA, depending on final specs and pricing.
 
B

Bigmonitorguy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
163
kasakka said:
That's way too reductive. Each of these technologies has its tradeoffs.

IPS tends to do well for desktop use as it has decent response time, viewing angles, color accuracy etc but low contrast ratio, IPS glow...
VA has higher contrast ratio but bad viewing angles andmore issues with pixel response times for dark transitions. Samsung has mostly solved the pixel response times in their models.
OLED has per pixel local dimming, excellent viewing angles and response times, but low peak/sustained brightness, pixel structures that don't work well for desktop use and potential for burn in.

Throw mini-LED backlights into the LCDs and results are varied - higher peak/sustained brightness than OLED but often at the expense of pixel response times and blooming due to not having per pixel dimming.

You just pick which compromises are acceptable to you. I won't pay the massive prices for e.g PG32UQX (mini-LED IPS) because its pixel response times suck for how expensive it is, I'm not looking to buy the Samsung Neo G7/G8 because of the issues those models have, I am not interested in QD-OLED because I need a 70% desktop use, 30% gaming display so the pixel structure issues are too much and the resolution is too low. It would be fine as a pure gaming display but I can just use my OLED TV for that.

Personally I don't care too much what technology is used but rather look at these things on a per display model basis. In the past about 8-10 years or something I've gone 30" 2560x1600 60 Hz IPS -> 27" 2560x1440 144 Hz TN -> 49" 5120x1440 120 Hz VA -> 48" 3840x2160 120 Hz OLED -> 28" 3840x2160 144 Hz IPS and am now looking to get a Samsung 57" 7680x2160 240 Hz VA, depending on final specs and pricing.
Click to expand...

The 57" is interesting for desktop use, but not sure it will be possible to buy it anytime soon. Seems like a niche low-yield product that they'll be in no hurry to start selling.
 
S

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
5,304
kasakka said:
IPS tends to do well for desktop use as it has decent response time, viewing angles, color accuracy etc but low contrast ratio, IPS glow...
VA has higher contrast ratio but bad viewing angles andmore issues with pixel response times for dark transitions. Samsung has mostly solved the pixel response times in their models.
OLED has per pixel local dimming, excellent viewing angles and response times, but low peak/sustained brightness, pixel structures that don't work well for desktop use and potential for burn in.
Click to expand...
Something I will say about IPS and its low contrast for desktop use that it isn't always a bad thing. High contrast can strain the eyes if you go at it for a long time. Actual paper has a fairly low contrast ratio, maybe 250:1 or so in the case of good paper and inks, less in the case of newsprint or the like. Yet people often will prefer a physical book because it is easier on the eyes compared to a screen. The reason is partially less contrast, partially the fact that since it is reflective the amount of light matches the surrounding light.

Also 100% doesn't matter in an office, the room lights are so bright that the reflections from the monitor ruin your contrast ratio.
 
revenant

revenant

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
15,478
I was planning an upgrade to this display but am ditching my 1900R for an LG C2 42" as my PC gaming display.... and a 4080 for native hdmi 2.1 and 4k grunt ... I like the ultrawide for FPS games but not RPG... missing that full face 4k real estate for those. That said the 1900R has been a great display for the last few years.
 
P

pj-

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 7, 2015
Messages
234
Just hit a year of mixed WFH and gaming with this monitor. No signs of image retention which is good but I've been pretty careful so it would have been pretty disappointing if there was any.

Aside from the dumb self power off issue it's been great and I doubt I will upgrade until high refresh 4k ultrawide oleds are a thing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top