£1000 Ultrawide Monitor

Soldato
Joined
2 Nov 2003
Posts
5,529
I just bought the Alienware 34 AW3418DW from a local well known high street retailer for £899 and its fantastic so far, everywhere else wanted £1000.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Posts
760
Have you tried going on the Dell live chat and haggling? It's what I did earlier on. Couldn't quite get the rep to match the lowest price I've seen but came out ordering for £879. Still not amazing but better than the over 1k they want for it. Though weirdly I can see a pending payment on my account for £600. Not sure why it's not the full amount.

Thanks Jon, managed to get a quote for £849. Just got to decide whether that is best value for money or if the LG is worth the additional £300 (which I'm struggling to see how it will be).
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
Thanks Jon, managed to get a quote for £849. Just got to decide whether that is best value for money or if the LG is worth the additional £300 (which I'm struggling to see how it will be).


They are quite tough with haggling. I tried when I bought mine (which I'm now selling) and they were a pain in the butt and very stiff.

I think they've stopped being so leniant.

The AW34 is a beautiful amazing screen with awesome build quality. It still does have the BLB issue (I have multiple) which nearly all UWs' have but its definitley the best built monitor I've ever owned. Another option is the CRG9 which is what I'm deviating towards and pushing me to sell one of them. But Now typing this, I feel it might be a mistake as I've had not so great experiences with Samsung screens.
 
Associate
Joined
12 Feb 2008
Posts
1,204
Location
Shropshire
Thanks Jon, managed to get a quote for £849. Just got to decide whether that is best value for money or if the LG is worth the additional £300 (which I'm struggling to see how it will be).
No problem :) I usually get swayed towards Dell monitors just for the customer support. Had an issue with a 2716DG monitor, was flickering at times. Got replaced after a few emails, no problem. That and the advanced replacement and no dead pixel policy.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2004
Posts
8,696
image.png


;)


(tidied since then, had just set it up :D)

Im loving mine aswell(1080 version), but the fisheye/stretchyness effect is not great the wider the screen is. I run most my games in 2560x1080 to minimize the fisheye/stretchyness effect.

I have my speakers a few inches ubove my monitor on a shelf.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
Im loving mine aswell(1080 version), but the fisheye/stretchyness effect is not great the wider the screen is. I run most my games in 2560x1080 to minimize the fisheye/stretchyness effect. I have my speakers a few inches ubove my monitor on a shelf.


what is the fish eye/stretchiness? are you saying you run it in a non 32:9 resolution? doesn't that defeat the purpose of having one.
 
Sgarrista
Commissario
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Posts
10,444
Location
Bromsgrove
what is the fish eye/stretchiness? are you saying you run it in a non 32:9 resolution? doesn't that defeat the purpose of having one.

Imho the res that works best for gaming is 21:9, once you go past that it becomes very noticeable that your filling out the width but lacking the height.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
Imho the res that works best for gaming is 21:9, once you go past that it becomes very noticeable that your filling out the width but lacking the height.
Having used a 32:9 vs a 21:9 i found the 21:9 (for games that support it) far superior. I wasn't missing the vertical resolution as much as just being totally mesmermised by how much immersion i had. Maybe I sit too close to my monitor but the default height we have not based off a 27inch 1440p screen seems fine for me.
I liek to be able to easily see my health bar and menus uptop. haha.

An inch or two would be nice though...

Any reasons other than height that you think 21:9 is better for gaming than 32:9?

what turns me off 32:9 the most is being a beta tester. that and the desk space/lack of support/fish eye distortion on some games/performance cost/

to be fair though, the fish eye didnt bother me as its in the periperhy of ur vision.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2004
Posts
8,696
what is the fish eye/stretchiness? are you saying you run it in a non 32:9 resolution? doesn't that defeat the purpose of having one.

Well yes, but the extra wideness for windows desktop is great.

Imho the res that works best for gaming is 21:9, once you go past that it becomes very noticeable that your filling out the width but lacking the height.
Yes 2560x1080 is 21:9, its odd tho because when watching racing replys back, they dont stretch at all.

what turns me off 32:9 the most is being a beta tester. that and the desk space/lack of support/fish eye distortion on some games/performance cost/

to be fair though, the fish eye didnt bother me as its in the periperhy of ur vision.

Thats the main reason I went for the 1080 version of the 49", so it wasn't so demanding on my pc and the text size wasn't too small either.. But yeah I hate the ratio being wrong on tv's or monitors as I cant stand pictures being stretched.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
29,812
Thats the main reason I went for the 1080 version of the 49", so it wasn't so demanding on my pc and the text size wasn't too small either.. But yeah I hate the ratio being wrong on tv's or monitors as I cant stand pictures being stretched.

I tried the 1080 version a while back but couldn't get on with it. Believe me when I say that the 1440p version is better in pretty much every way, am v happy with it :)
 
Associate
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Posts
760
Another option is the CRG9 which is what I'm deviating towards and pushing me to sell one of them. But Now typing this, I feel it might be a mistake as I've had not so great experiences with Samsung screens.

I have been thinking about the CRG9 but my monitor that just went pop was also a Samsung. However, I have dual 27" monitors and the CRG9 makes sense as a direct replacement for both in terms of size but I'm not sure whether a single 34" UW will be a better fit.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
I have been thinking about the CRG9 but my monitor that just went pop was also a Samsung. However, I have dual 27" monitors and the CRG9 makes sense as a direct replacement for both in terms of size but I'm not sure whether a single 34" UW will be a better fit.

I had a Samsung TV which also went pop with the backlight.

I think 34'' ultrawide with 100hz+ refresh rate is probably the sweetspot in terms of price/performance/usability/being able to actually power it. If you're concerned about monitors going poop then the AW3418DW is your monitor.

I have a 34'' ultrawide and it feels just right. It feels like how PC/Monitor gaming should be. I've tried a 49'' ultrawide (and its one of I'm now eyeying up because I'm just never satisified) and it was more immersive but using the actual monitor for doing stuff was hard. And in games, the FOV was sometimes very fish-eyed which sucked.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Posts
760
Yeah I think I agree with you. Just got to decide whether I go for the Alienware AW3418DW for £850 or the LG 34GK950F for £1,150.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
Yeah I think I agree with you. Just got to decide whether I go for the Alienware AW3418DW for £850 or the LG 34GK950F for £1,150.

I have one in the members market for £700 still with 1000 days of warranty 1-2 months old.

Its 24hz + slightly wider colour gamut vs better warranty, build quality and customer service.

I had a similar dilemma with DAC amps and I've learnt that there is no substitute for build quality, reliability and better customer service. Thats ignoring the £300-500 saving dependant on if you buy it new or from the members market.

If this LG was the 38 inch model or it had a wider aspect ratio, I'd think its more food for thought, but given the QC issues and the fact that returning or RMAing will be a PAIN with LG and most re-sellers of the screen, I couldn't get behind the idea of buying one.

If you get a second hand one for £700 or so, thats a £450 saving which is more than 50% of the cost of the LG. If you get it for 850, it's still £300 saving which is more than a third of the price of the AW.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
29,812
Yeah I think I agree with you. Just got to decide whether I go for the Alienware AW3418DW for £850 or the LG 34GK950F for £1,150.

Had both (the AW briefly, had an issue then moved onto the LG for 9 months) and both are good choices. Is the LG worth £300 more? Possibly not, esp if you plan to stick to nV cards.

If you can get a s/h AW for 650/700 with good warranty then imo go for that, make sure the bleed isn't bad though as it can be.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
I did see your monitor in the MM but unfortunately you aren't that local to me!

Thanks all for your help

No problem. Could meet halfway? haha.

Regardless of where you buy it from, as @JediFragger said, for £650-700, the AW is a no brainer for cost:performance:quality:reliability. And Dell's warranty transfers which is crazy!
 
Associate
Joined
12 Feb 2008
Posts
1,204
Location
Shropshire
Wasn't sure where to put this. Got the AW3418DW, first time I've used it at night and I've noticed this:

Ns2MBkI.jpg

Is that just IPS glow or BLB in the bottom left? To the eye, it seems to take up most of the bottom left corner and is quite noticable. Not sure if it's RMA worthy though?

Edit: All black screen. Not the best of pics and the camera is perhaps making it look worse but can definitely see the orange glow.

sdcI44g.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom