Acer XR382CQK 37.5 INCH Ultrawide Monitor

I really hope the advancement of 34" models aren't left behind in the pursuit for an even bigger display... 37.5/38" 21.9 is just too much imo, even 34" is pushing it for wideness to my eyes...
 
Nexus18 said:
I really hope the advancement of 34" models aren't left behind in the pursuit for an even bigger display... 37.5/38" 21.9 is just too much imo, even 34" is pushing it for wideness to my eyes...
Click to expand...

I don't think that's something we need to worry about too much, While I've yet to confirm it someone replied to my post on the video claiming the Freesync working range is from 48 to 75 hz, The 38" LG also had a similar range so I don't think they've perfected doing this size panel yet, just like they haven't sussed the 144hz 4k panel, so it'll be a few years before this is anything but a niche product.
 
Last edited:
In what way is it "superior"?

All the "fair" expert review sites where they have compared like for like in their testing found there to be no real world difference between the 2 and this was with the early versions before low frame rate compensation and other improvements were added... Also, seen plenty of people on here who have had both and said they found them the same.

Both have their short comings i.e. freesync - the range and iirc still not working fully with windowed mode, gsync - the lack of connection ports as well as introducing scan line issues under certain conditions when pushing monitors to their very max + lack of choice for brands + panel types as well as the massive extra cost it adds. Is gsync really worth the £200 and often £300+ more than the freesync equivalent?

Gsync does handle the lower range better but at the end of day, regardless of free/g sync, I wouldn't want to be dropping below 50 very often as low fps is still low fps.

JediFragger said:
I must admit that after owning an X34 and now the 38UC99 I have to agree. Hopefully Freesync2 will fix its shortcomings.
Click to expand...
You can't really compare those screens as they are very different i.e. the acer being aimed for gamers and the LG for business/work, for starters the LG has considerably higher input lag than the acer.

RculNck.png
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
You can't really compare those screens as they are very different i.e. the acer being aimed for gamers and the LG for business/work, for starters the LG has considerably higher input lag than the acer.
Click to expand...

Yup, it's true it's not a dedicated gaming monitor so I'm being a touch unfair on the LG. I find it's fine and smooth as long as the fps is kept above 65.
 
Making the Acer G-Sync would have made for an actual untapped market. First G-Sync 3840x1600. Having the Acer identical to the LG just cuts into each others market.
 
Not sure why monitor manufacturers are dancing around what a lot of gamers actually want.

This without g-sync, no 144 ultra wide, no 100hz 32 4k.
 
JediFragger said:
I must admit that after owning an X34 and now the 38UC99 I have to agree. Hopefully Freesync2 will fix its shortcomings.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find it's that particular monitor's Freesync support that is lacking not Freesync itself.
Because Freesync is open source adaptive sync it is up to the monitor manufacturer to use components with good quality Freesync compatability,
After looking across LG's entire Freesync range it seems that they do not use the right panels,
Add to that how at the moment the 38" panels do not seem to be capable of supporting the full Freesync range and a poor experience is to be expected.
I had my heart set on a 29" LG ultrawide before Freesync was a thing and once Freesync was announced I decided to wait for that before buying an ultrawide monitor.
When the first LG Freesync ultrawides appeared I held off because the working range did not go low enough.

Today's LG Freesync monitors are lacking in the two most important ways.
One is how wide the Freesync working range is and the other is supporting LFC (Low framerate compensation).

You bought a monitor with a small working range and no LFC.
In comparison if you had bought the 34" Acer Freesync equivalent to your Acer G-sync monitor you would have got a much better experience with a range that starts at 30 hz and supports LFC.
It seems that the 38" panels are not yet capable of providing the full Freesync experience.

If you scroll down this page and pick the monitor option in the box you'll see the relevant data

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/technologies-gaming/freesync

This is how the Freesync tech on the LG 38", Acer 38" and Acer 34" compare


This graph shows the important points mentioned.

Range
LFC support?

LG 38"/ ACER 38"/ ACER 34"


52-75/ 48-75/ 30-75
No/ No/ Yes


In my opinion these are the two most important features for Freesync,
It is where G-sync has total control of a G-sync monitor and where Freesync is at the mercy of the monitor manufacturer.
As we can see both the 38" Acer and 38" LG monitor's are in the same boat with a working range which does not go low enough,
That along with having no LFC when the fps in a game drops below the working range is why your Freesync experience is not how you hoped it would be.
 
Last edited:
Good info, thanks.

Don't get me wrong, in the main it's a fantastic monitor I just wish it was a touch better of a gaming panel. Guess you can't have it all!! :D

(coming from the X34 probably didn't help, excellent for gaming that)
 
IIRC, the freesync range isn't down to the panel but the scaler used. The gsync module replaces the scaler, which is why gsync monitors only have display port (as well as HDMI with the newer version)
 
Personally I have no issue with 38", but given the cost of my X34 I can't help but feel anything else is going to be somewhat of a sidegrade and not the best value move, what with the prospect of HDR monitors later this year. That is going to be a real game changer. May be a while before we see 21:9 HDR though, but such a monitor will be pretty epic!
 
nashathedog said:
I think you'll find it's that particular monitor's Freesync support that is lacking not Freesync itself.
Because Freesync is open source adaptive sync it is up to the monitor manufacturer to use components with good quality Freesync compatability,
After looking across LG's entire Freesync range it seems that they do not use the right panels,
Add to that how at the moment the 38" panels do not seem to be capable of supporting the full Freesync range and a poor experience is to be expected.
I had my heart set on a 29" LG ultrawide before Freesync was a thing and once Freesync was announced I decided to wait for that before buying an ultrawide monitor.
When the first LG Freesync ultrawides appeared I held off because the working range did not go low enough.

Today's LG Freesync monitors are lacking in the two most important ways.
One is how wide the Freesync working range is and the other is supporting LFC (Low framerate compensation).

You bought a monitor with a small working range and no LFC.
In comparison if you had bought the 34" Acer Freesync equivalent to your Acer G-sync monitor you would have got a much better experience with a range that starts at 30 hz and supports LFC.
It seems that the 38" panels are not yet capable of providing the full Freesync experience.

If you scroll down this page and pick the monitor option in the box you'll see the relevant data

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/technologies-gaming/freesync

This is how the Freesync tech on the LG 38", Acer 38" and Acer 34" compare


This graph shows the important points mentioned.

Range
LFC support?

LG 38"/ ACER 38"/ ACER 34"


52-75/ 48-75/ 30-75
No/ No/ Yes


In my opinion these are the two most important features for Freesync,
It is where G-sync has total control of a G-sync monitor and where Freesync is at the mercy of the monitor manufacturer.
As we can see both the 38" Acer and 38" LG monitor's are in the same boat with a working range which does not go low enough,
That along with having no LFC when the fps in a game drops below the working range is why your Freesync experience is not how you hoped it would be.
Click to expand...

The only LG UW with freesync worth considering is the 34" 2560x1080 144hz gaming monitor, it has a very wide range. But yeah the 29" is a 75hz panel with something like 20hz freesync range. So really limited choice. 29" for better sharper PPI and probably best res for the size, only 75hz poor freesync range, but too small vertically. 34" LG 144hz good freesync range but at the size low PPI despite being able to have good FPS
 
JediFragger said:
Good info, thanks.

Don't get me wrong, in the main it's a fantastic monitor I just wish it was a touch better of a gaming panel. Guess you can't have it all!! :D

(coming from the X34 probably didn't help, excellent for gaming that)
Click to expand...

The Freesync Acer XR34 is a great gaming monitor too,


Nexus18 said:
IIRC, the freesync range isn't down to the panel but the scaler used. The gsync module replaces the scaler, which is why gsync monitors only have display port (as well as HDMI with the newer version)
Click to expand...

I'm only guessing at why both LG and Acer haven't released 38" models with better ranges, I was only pointing out why the experience of Freesync on such a monitor won't be as good as it could be.
If it's just a scaler and there's no panel limitation in play with these new 38" panels it's odd that Acer out of all of them would now do a top of the range model without the full available range and LFC when they've been doing the best Freesync Ultrawides to date,

I've had a 144hz 2560x1080 VA and a 75hz 3440x1440 IPS from Acer. I've also had a 2560x1440 Asus Dominator, That was a horrible monitor that didn't even run Freesync beyond 90 even though it was a 144hz monitor.
 
hornetstinger said:
The only LG UW with freesync worth considering is the 34" 2560x1080 144hz gaming monitor, it has a very wide range. But yeah the 29" is a 75hz panel with something like 20hz freesync range. So really limited choice. 29" for better sharper PPI and probably best res for the size, only 75hz poor freesync range, but too small vertically. 34" LG 144hz good freesync range but at the size low PPI despite being able to have good FPS
Click to expand...

I haven't had a proper look at that one yet, It sounds a lot better than the other models.

Nexus18 said:
Probably down to the price i.e. the better the scaler, the higher the cost will be.
Click to expand...

It could be but personally if I'm spending over a grand on monitor I'd prefer to spend an extra few hundred for a decent scaler to get the wider range and the LFC,
From what I read, for a Freesync monitor to support LFC it's minimum working range (hz) needs to be under the maximum working range (hz) when doubled,
LFC's a newish addition to Freesync which work in a similar way to G-sync when framerates drop below 30 fps, It does so by doubling up on the available frames.

If I've got any of this wrong I'd appreciate getting corrected :)
 
nashathedog said:
I haven't had a proper look at that yet.



It could be but personally if I'm spending over a grand on monitor I'd prefer to spend an extra few hundred for a decent scaler to get the wider range and the LFC,
From what I read, for a Freesync monitor to support LFC it's minimum working range (hz) needs to be under the maximum working range (hz) when doubled,
LFC's a newish addition to Freesync which work in a similar way to G-sync when framerates drop below 30 fps, It does so by doubling up on the available frames.

If I've got any of this wrong I'd appreciate getting corrected :)
Click to expand...

29UC88
34UC79G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom