Alienware takes its 34-inch ultrawide gaming displays to the next level with Quantum

[WYP]

This screen can deliver 175Hz refresh rates and a 3440x1440 resolution.



Read more about Alienware's 34-inch AW3423DW Quantum Dot OLED Gaming Monitor.

 

[Dawelio]

Yet they didn't take their product naming to the next level...

 

[grassman]

ughhh anti glare coating, they done fuct it up

 

[Dicehunter]

ughhh anti glare coating, they done fuct it up

Exactly, I wish companies would stop using anti-glare matte coating as it really does mute colours compared to gloss, Dave2D showed a side by side comparison recently and gloss looks so much better, Picture looks sharper, Colours pop more.

 

[NeverBackDown]

But then you get glare from the tiniest sources of light.. some anti glare is fine. 3H I believe is the standard, they should lower it a bit imo.

 

[Dicehunter]

But then you get glare from the tiniest sources of light.. some anti glare is fine. 3H I believe is the standard, they should lower it a bit imo.

Or maybe just sell monitors with zero coating as an option and just have glass, I'd snap one up instantly.

 

[amon.akira]

But then you get glare from the tiniest sources of light.. some anti glare is fine. 3H I believe is the standard, they should lower it a bit imo.

3h is the quality, haze can be 2% to 30%, something like 16% is already good, i was a glossy fan (i have removed the coat from few display ^^') but today i have changed my idea...a light antiglare is better overall.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Or maybe just sell monitors with zero coating as an option and just have glass, I'd snap one up instantly.

You'd hate that option. Even TVs have an anti glare coating. Otherwise glass, a material that is entirely reflective shows EVERY tiny source of light. All the monitor industry needs to do is lower the amount of coating used.

I have a cheap monitor that is basically as I described and the colors are way better. Sure it reflects light but it's not an annoying amount. Something like that (idk the overall percentage) is ideal imo.

 

[Dicehunter]

You'd hate that option. Even TVs have an anti glare coating. Otherwise glass, a material that is entirely reflective shows EVERY tiny source of light. All the monitor industry needs to do is lower the amount of coating used.

I have a cheap monitor that is basically as I described and the colors are way better. Sure it reflects light but it's not an annoying amount. Something like that (idk the overall percentage) is ideal imo.

I had a monitor ages ago that had zero anti glare with just glass of some sort over it, Reflections don't bother me TBH.

 

[Warchild]

Or maybe just sell monitors with zero coating as an option and just have glass, I'd snap one up instantly.

Trust me, being someone who had one. You will hate it. The slightest light from your bedroom lightbulb ruins it. The smallest daylight reflected directly onto the screen shows you a reflection of your room etc..

The Samsung screen I had was terrible for it. Gave it away in the end.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

The main reason I swapped monitors years ago was because of glare. A matte surface is essential in my opinion. Maybe 0.001% of the market will be able to control all light sources in their room for as long as they need, but the vast majority of people aren't able to do that. It's like saying GPU manufacturers should sell us their GPU as a chip alone because I want to create my own PCB and cooler.

 

[WYP]

The main reason I swapped monitors years ago was because of glare. A matte surface is essential in my opinion. Maybe 0.001% of the market will be able to control all light sources in their room for as long as they need, but the vast majority of people aren't able to do that. It's like saying GPU manufacturers should sell us their GPU as a chip alone because I want to create my own PCB and cooler.

Yeah. I also like having a good anti-glare surface on my monitors. I don't want reflections on my screens, especially if I am playing games with dark areas.

 

[AlienALX]

*raises hand*. You wanna try living in a rooftop flat in the sunniest part of the UK in summer without that coating.

 

[MiNo]

I have been waiting years for 32/34 OLED monitor ... might not want to pay for the first batch if insane - but so happy to see they are finally arriving.


After all OLED TV panels dont cost a fortune anymore, so it should be very much possible to make these at fair prices also - like the OLED TV's.


Heres hoping at least.

 

[grassman]

But then you get glare from the tiniest sources of light.. some anti glare is fine. 3H I believe is the standard, they should lower it a bit imo.

But then what's the point of getting a high end display if you aren't going to benefit from it? Most people can control the lights in there own home, Anti Glare is better off in office environments.

 

[NeverBackDown]

But then what's the point of getting a high end display if you aren't going to benefit from it? Most people can control the lights in there own home, Anti Glare is better off in office environments.

Being able to actually see it reflection free? ^_^

The industry has just increased the coating. They need to reduce it. As it is it's a little to much. I have older monitors that have way less and are good enough for a home environment as most rooms don't have strong lighting and as long as it's not directly facing the monitor it'll be good enough.

 

[Warchild]

But then what's the point of getting a high end display if you aren't going to benefit from it? Most people can control the lights in there own home, Anti Glare is better off in office environments.

The current Anti glare used is to cater for all scenarios i guess. I can 100% certifiably guarantee, your monitor would not be usable if it had no anti glare at all unless you used it in pitch black darkness and ensure your pc did not emit any light at all.

The smallest of light sources will cause image reflections to be visible.

My issue with lessening the anti glare as suggested by NBD (not sure how much the values make a difference as I am a "newb" on these specs) is that while it might be suitable in my current environment, if I were to move home, or move the screen to a different room with a brighter light source, would I then suffer with image relections?

When you dump £2700 on a monitor like i did, I don't want any disturbances, glaring, reflections of my curtains or windows etc. The picture quality is still fantastic and I dont think any anti glare tech has taken that away for me.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Well that's why you gotta pick your poison. Ideally they would send out glass screens and then a standard anti glare coating that could wrap around the monitor if you desired, say something like it slides into the side bezels of the monitor. Make it a standard fitment across the industry and I think it would be a great idea that could potentially solve everyone's needs and life changes where monitors are moved around to different light intensity environments