Acer Predator XR341CK/X34 34" Curved Gaming Screens with FreeSync and G-sync

Vega · 22 Jan 2015 at 19:38

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/33.htm#acer_xr341ck

Spec wise both versions offer a 34" ultra-wide screen size with 21:9 aspect ratio and a curved screen format. They are based on IPS panel technology and given we are only aware of LG.Display producing IPS-type panels in this sector, they are likely to be AH-IPS from LG.Display. The screens have a 3440 x 1440 resolution and support refresh rates up to 75Hz. Some people may be disappointed that there is not support for 120 - 144Hz but that is not possible at the moment from current IPS-type panels of this size and format. At least there is a bit of a boost beyond 60Hz potentially here which is something. The support for dynamic refresh rates via the G-sync or FreeSync technologies will help users cope with the demand of the high resolution as well here and are certainly welcome.

Acer tweeted it will be available August 2015.

Vega · 23 Jan 2015 at 06:17

toto42 said:
In theory DP1.2 should be able to handle up to 145Hz at this resolution.

Yup, here's to hoping the G-Sync module can handle it and hold up!

Vega · 23 Jan 2015 at 09:40

wunkley said:
If dp 1.2 will be 'pushing the limits' they really shouldn't bother with 144hz and just stick at 120. I run my rog swift at 120hz all the time for a number of reasons. The difference bewteen 120 and 144 is imperceptible. Zero need for 144hz IMO.

Hopefully it will have ULMB mode like the Acer announced Acer. ULMB @ 120Hz is perfect.

Vega · 25 Jan 2015 at 03:12

pmc25 said:
Says nothing of the sort.

From what I understood from discussion on other forums previously, G-Synch controllers cannot max the downstream DP1.2 bandwidth due to the nature of the 2 way synch. 3440x1440 @144 absolutely maxes DP1.2 with no room to spare.

So far we haven't heard any word of new G-Synch controllers with DP1.3

If it remains DP1.2, I don't expect the G-Synch version to work at 144hz in G-Synch mode if it is 3440x1440.

As it's late Q2 availability, one would fully expect the VESA adaptive synch one to be DP1.3, giving it plenty of wiggle room with bandwidth (and synch isn't 2 way anyway).

P.S. Unless I got my numbers wrong, I think the panel has to be 6bit plus dithering if it is to do 144hz @ 3440x1440 over DP1.2 (even without g-synch). 8bit panel would be too much bandwidth. This would remove most of the attraction for me ... I haven't seen a 6bit 144hz TN panel look as good as the 8bit Swift or Viewsonic VG2401mh (nowhere close). I get the feeling this will be a highly compromised product ... or at least some of the SKUs will be.

Hm, are you sure you are doing the bandwidth calculation right?

3440x1440@144Hz@4:4:4@8-bit I'm getting 17,12 Gbps. That is slightly lower than the max DP 1.2 value of 17,28Gbps with overhead removed.

Is there any formula for the G-Sync bandwidth traffic? I couldn't imagine it being that much considering what it does.

Vega · 26 Jan 2015 at 10:46

lol, why do people think manufactures have to design LCD refresh rates based off of random people's GPU setups?

Refresh rates should always be pushed to the highest extent possible given the panel capabilities and connection bandwidth.

Vega · 12 Feb 2015 at 07:47

Going by the styling, the one image posted on TFTCentral? That stand and bezel doesn't look "budget" to me at all.

Vega · 11 Apr 2015 at 15:47

Acer just tweeted that the monitor will be available in August. I'd post the tweet but this forum has a serious fetish about not posting images.

Now that we have a release date maybe Badass would be able to verify what the entire gaming world wants to know: Is it indeed a 3440x1440 curved 144 Hz G-Sync ULMB VA/IPS?

Vega · 11 Apr 2015 at 17:57

Gibbo said:
Missed this sorry mate.
They are IPS, 3440x1440 and there will be a Freesync version around £899 and a G-Sync version around £999

If I remember right our container is due around end of July, I will put them on the website in coming days for pre-order as I know UK will be getting less than 500 of each so sure to sell out.

The 35" versions also coming can't remember if I mentioned these but these shall be VA panel variants.

Oh wow awesome news. :eek:

Vega · 11 Apr 2015 at 18:54

Does OcUK offer any screen testing before shipping services? Having a pricey monitor shipped over to the US, I'd pay pretty good to have someone check out the monitor for panel defects before shipping.

Vega · 12 Apr 2015 at 14:36

Gibbo can you confirm this is a 144Hz display and not 60? That would make all the difference in the world.

Vega · 15 Apr 2015 at 20:01

Oh well. 75 Hz just means it's a slightly overclocked version of one of the current 34" panels.

I guess I'll go do a 3x portrait 27" Acer Predator setup...

As for the 35" VA, I'm not expecting much out of that either.

Vega · 16 Apr 2015 at 10:21

Ya, if the 35" VA is 2560x1080 it's a non starter too. Even at 144 Hz. That would be incredibly large pixels.

Vega · 16 Apr 2015 at 20:04

Ya at that low of Ppi you would need to push the monitor way back, negating and size and curve benefit.

Vega · 5 Jun 2015 at 05:28

100 Hz maybe?

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/4/8726489/acer-asus-curved-monitors-computex-2015

Interested again..

Vega · 6 Jun 2015 at 17:52

Ya, looks like I will buy one to at least test out.

Vega · 5 Jul 2015 at 17:24

Disaster of the XB270HU? It's the best gaming monitor you can buy on the market.

I'm just hoping with G-Sync's variable overdrive ability they will be able to get the G-Sync version up to 100 Hz. I really don't care about the freesync version.

Vega · 6 Jul 2015 at 16:49

Yes, I've gotten one of the first ones and besides the normal design annoyances like the bright power LED which can be fixed with a little tape and the gloss bezels that can be spray painted matte, it's great.

No monitor out there matches the picture quality and motion clarity of it. I do realize there are bad samples, but returning it for another isn't the end of the world like some make it out to be.

Vega · 6 Jul 2015 at 21:40

varkanoid said:
it is to some when the replacement is as bad or worse than the previous one or the replacement STILL has not turned up. OCUK received 250 units of which Acer have openly said were a bad batch. OCUK employed Acer to sort the problem out yet Acer have left customers high and dry so yes for some spending £700 on a monitor and getting a lame duck with no resolution in sight is the end of the world for them.

What you need to understand is people on here read the review on TFTCentral of how good the monitor was and were salivating to the gills then when they paid £700 (around $1092) and it turned up it was an almighty turd fraught with QC problems. Acer are the Alpha Romeo of the monitor world. A good maybe monitor but if you get a bad one then you are in a whole world of hurt.

Ah, it sounds like you guys across the pond are having more issues than those of us in the US. Yes, we do get some bad samples but nothing on the scale you are speaking of. I wonder if the "bad batch" is just Europe/UK? I had one of the first in the US and it's great.

Vega · 10 Jul 2015 at 21:17

Good review Baddass as always. Could you double check your math though on DP 1.2. I'm getting DP 1.2 with overhead removed can do 3440 x 1440 up to 145 Hz.

DP 1.2 should be able to do 3440 x 1440 at 144 Hz, but that doesn't mean the internal electronics like G-Sync can do it (1st gen G-Sync cannot do full DP 1.2), and of course the 3440 x 1440 screens have a serious panel speed issue.

Vega · 12 Jul 2015 at 05:34

@md_guy said:
you can't remove the overhead..

you need to revisit your math.. DP 1.2 has just over 17Gbit/s of available bandwidth..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

DP 1.1 = High Bit Rate = 10.8 Gbit/s Raw = 8.64 Effective (video) (10.8 x .8)
DP 1.2 = High Bit Rate 2 (HBR2) = 21.6 Gbit Raw = 17.28 Effective (21.6 x .8)
DP 1.3 = High Bit Rate 3 (HBR3) = 32.4GBit Raw = 25.92 Gbit Effective (32.4 x .8)

What is RAW vs Effective you may ask..

RAW = the total available bandwidth , Effective = "real" bandwidth AFTER 8b/10b encoding is taken into account. ie the data seen is only 80% of the total sent.

You see, when data is sent over there are 10 bits total, for every 8 bits of information. The extra 2 bits are used for encoding and transmission. In laymans, think of these are the <1B--BEGIN HERE><DATA --- 8B><END HERE--1B> (yes yes I know is MUCH more than that.. )

So for every 8 bits of "color" (data) this is sent in a 10 bit "package"..

Now lets look at how many pixels are needed for JUST one frame

3440 x 1440 = 4,953,600 Pixels

Take that and multiply by the desired FPS (limited by Hz).. ie 144 cycles per second

4,953,600 x 144 (FPS/Hz) = 713,318,400 pixels per sec !!!

Now remember we have 3 "colors" (RGB) aka channels.. EACH one sent in 10 bit packets..

713,318,400 x 3 (channels) x 10 bits (per channel) = 21399552000 of Video Data Rate

This comes to 21.40Gb/s of data, far exceeding the 17.28Gbit/s available.

Edit: Availabel resources:

https://www.amd.com/Documents/50279_AMD_FirePro_DisplayPort_1-2_WP.pdf
http://www.displayport.org/faq/
http://www.audioholics.com/hdtv-for...-standard-v1.0/displayportdvihdmicompared.gif
http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/VESA_DSC-ETP200.pdf

Too bad your math is double tapping overhead. 8b/10b is with the overhead, so you can't try and fit a 8b/10b number (21.40) into a number with 8b/10b encoding overhead removed (17.28).

Perfect example is HDMI 2.0 which can run 4K @ 60 Hz just fine and has the following specs:

Maximum total TMDS throughput (Gbit/s) including 8b/10b overhead - 18
Maximum throughput (Gbit/s) with 8b/10b overhead removed - 14.4

3840x2160 = 8294400 x 60 = 497664000 x 3 = 1492992000 x 10 = 14.93 Gbit/s. Clearly that fits into 8b/10b overhead of 18 Gbit/s but over 8b/10b overhead removed - 14.4 Gbit/s.

The proper math for overhead removed:

3840x2160 = 8294400 x 60 = 497664000 x 3 = 1492992000 x 8 = 11.94 Gbit/s.

So once again, DP 1.2 can do 3440x1440 up to and including 145 Hz.