Upvote Upvoted 17 Downvote Downvoted
Acer Z35 // 200hz overclock
posted in Hardware
1
#1
0 Frags +

https://i.imgur.com/vZReb0b.jpg

Release Date: December 2015 @ $1199.99 USD.
Resolution 2560x1080
Refresh Rate 144Hz native, 200Hz overclock
Panel Size 35"
Panel Type AMVA
Response Time 12ms, 4ms (G2G)
Viewing Angle (H/V) 178° / 178°
Color Depth 16.7 million colors (8bit)

Expensive, not the best response time,and an unfortunate resolution as far as text scaling goes for ultrawide's, but sheesh 200hz. I really hope my local microcenter gets this so I can actually see it.

Here's the writeup on Anandtech

[img]https://i.imgur.com/vZReb0b.jpg[/img]

Release Date: December 2015 @ $1199.99 USD.
Resolution 2560x1080
Refresh Rate 144Hz native, 200Hz overclock
Panel Size 35"
Panel Type AMVA
Response Time 12ms, 4ms (G2G)
Viewing Angle (H/V) 178° / 178°
Color Depth 16.7 million colors (8bit)

Expensive, not the best response time,and an unfortunate resolution as far as text scaling goes for ultrawide's, but sheesh 200hz. I really hope my local microcenter gets this so I can actually see it.

Here's the writeup on [url=http://www.anandtech.com/show/9592/acer-announces-200hz-display]Anandtech[/url]
2
#2
6 Frags +

holy shit!

edit : just saw the response time, now im not as hyped but also the fact that i probably wouldn't need such a large monitor

also WAAAAY too expensive

holy shit!

edit : just saw the response time, now im not as hyped but also the fact that i probably wouldn't need such a large monitor

also WAAAAY too expensive
3
#3
6 Frags +

that will be crazy but sure wont be worth my money

i would be more interested in getting a 120hz 4k oled than something like that most likely

that will be crazy but sure wont be worth my money

i would be more interested in getting a 120hz 4k oled than something like that most likely
4
#4
10 Frags +

isn't response time as important as refresh rate for competitive fps's ?

isn't response time as important as refresh rate for competitive fps's ?
5
#5
15 Frags +
Kanecoisn't response time as important as refresh rate for competitive fps's ?

It is

[quote=Kaneco]isn't response time as important as refresh rate for competitive fps's ?[/quote]
It is
6
#6
4 Frags +

Having a 200Hz. refresh rate is really only useful if you can maintain that high of a framerate, and I don't know of anybody in the TF.TV community that walks around with 400 FPS constant.

Having a 200Hz. refresh rate is really only useful if you can maintain that high of a framerate, and I don't know of anybody in the TF.TV community that walks around with 400 FPS constant.
7
#7
2 Frags +

unless seriously rich, i don't see how anyone could justify purchasing this..
not even if the response time was way lower.
but i guess it's a good indication of what's ahead of us in terms of monitors?

unless seriously rich, i don't see how anyone could justify purchasing this..
not even if the response time was way lower.
but i guess it's a good indication of what's ahead of us in terms of monitors?
8
#8
14 Frags +
ViperHaving a 200Hz. refresh rate is really only useful if you can maintain that high of a framerate, and I don't know of anybody in the TF.TV community that walks around with 400 FPS constant.

You just can't lol, tf2 engine is so "well" optimized that not even NASA computers would be able to do it.

[quote=Viper]Having a 200Hz. refresh rate is really only useful if you can maintain that high of a framerate, and I don't know of anybody in the TF.TV community that walks around with 400 FPS constant.[/quote]
You just can't lol, tf2 engine is so "well" optimized that not even NASA computers would be able to do it.
9
#9
0 Frags +

ah yes. gaming tv

ah yes. gaming tv
10
#10
15 Frags +

will wait 6 years for this to become the standard and buy one for my fridge or something

will wait 6 years for this to become the standard and buy one for my fridge or something
11
#11
Momentum Mod
-2 Frags +

acer blows so iunno about this

acer blows so iunno about this
12
#12
1 Frags +
Phunkthat will be crazy but sure wont be worth my money

i would be more interested in getting a 120hz 4k oled than something like that most likely

Only issue is because you have to use display port for 4K they also have really shit response time

[quote=Phunk]that will be crazy but sure wont be worth my money

i would be more interested in getting a 120hz 4k oled than something like that most likely[/quote]

Only issue is because you have to use display port for 4K they also have really shit response time
13
#13
3 Frags +

oled is still very expensive. It will be great when those come down in prices and start being implemented more widely.

Tino_Only issue is because you have to use display port for 4K they also have really shit response time

display port shouldn't be an issue. it's the best port on any consumer tv / monitor

oled is still very expensive. It will be great when those come down in prices and start being implemented more widely.


[quote=Tino_]
Only issue is because you have to use display port for 4K they also have really shit response time[/quote]

display port shouldn't be an issue. it's the best port on any consumer tv / monitor
14
#14
3 Frags +
Pharaoh
@ $1199.99 USD.

HAHAHAHA

[quote=Pharaoh]

@ $1199.99 USD.
[/quote]

HAHAHAHA
15
#15
4 Frags +

good lord. 200+ FPS constant in TF2 let alone at 2560x1080. And the $1200 usd price tag

GOOD LUCK BOIZ

good lord. 200+ FPS constant in TF2 let alone at 2560x1080. And the $1200 usd price tag

GOOD LUCK BOIZ
16
#16
4 Frags +

I don't understand the obsession with large monitors when u sit 2 feet away from it, its hard enough to see peripherals with an average lcd. at least for competitive gaming I don't think large monitors help at all. I'd buy a 200hz 24" (or smaller, I prefer smaller monitors than 24 tbh)

this one would be pretty sick for racing games I think. 12ms response time sounds disgusting but manufacturers lie about response time anyway, I highly doubt 24" 144hz asus or benq lcd is 1ms, they could just be telling the truth on this monitor lmao. anyways cool to see this but definitely not for me

& I would not trade the fw900 for this or anything atm pharoah^^

I don't understand the obsession with large monitors when u sit 2 feet away from it, its hard enough to see peripherals with an average lcd. at least for competitive gaming I don't think large monitors help at all. I'd buy a 200hz 24" (or smaller, I prefer smaller monitors than 24 tbh)

this one would be pretty sick for racing games I think. 12ms response time sounds disgusting but manufacturers lie about response time anyway, I highly doubt 24" 144hz asus or benq lcd is 1ms, they could just be telling the truth on this monitor lmao. anyways cool to see this but definitely not for me

& I would not trade the fw900 for this or anything atm pharoah^^
17
#17
0 Frags +
yukigood lord. 200+ FPS constant in TF2 let alone at 2560x1080. And the $1200 usd price tag

GOOD LUCK BOIZ

yuki confirmed polish?

[quote=yuki]good lord. 200+ FPS constant in TF2 let alone at 2560x1080. And the $1200 usd price tag

GOOD LUCK BOIZ[/quote]

yuki confirmed polish?
18
#18
2 Frags +

Nah, he's just really into Polish animation, a Polaboo.

Nah, he's just really into Polish animation, a Polaboo.
19
#19
3 Frags +

polish background, old surname was russian

go figure. nice derail boys

polish background, old surname was russian

go figure. nice derail boys
20
#20
1 Frags +
wonderlandsnip

It is a strange trend seeing 27 inch and above monitors being heavily marketed as gaming monitors.

I would like to try something like this out for the fov gain.

I've seen some people test the 1ms monitors agasint crt's using a high speed camera and usually the non crt's have poor grey to grey performance.

A 1ms 144hz+ VA or IPS 24 inch panel would be nice

[quote=wonderland]snip[/quote]

It is a strange trend seeing 27 inch and above monitors being heavily marketed as gaming monitors.

I would like to try something like this out for the fov gain.

I've seen some people test the 1ms monitors agasint crt's using a high speed camera and usually the non crt's have poor grey to grey performance.

A 1ms 144hz+ VA or IPS 24 inch panel would be nice
21
#21
0 Frags +
Pharaohwonderlandsnip
It is a strange trend seeing 27 inch and above monitors being heavily marketed as gaming monitors.

I would like to try something like this out for the fov gain.

I've seen some people test the 1ms monitors agasint crt's using a high speed camera and usually the non crt's have poor grey to grey performance.

A 1ms 144hz+ VA or IPS 24 inch panel would be nice

modern VA and IPS have inherently bad GTG performance though

maybe in the future with a version that targets better response times, but nowadays the only IPS 144Hz panels are ones that are overclocked, and the refresh rate is there but since GTG is so poor it's almost worthless

[quote=Pharaoh][quote=wonderland]snip[/quote]

It is a strange trend seeing 27 inch and above monitors being heavily marketed as gaming monitors.

I would like to try something like this out for the fov gain.

I've seen some people test the 1ms monitors agasint crt's using a high speed camera and usually the non crt's have poor grey to grey performance.

A 1ms 144hz+ VA or IPS 24 inch panel would be nice[/quote]
modern VA and IPS have inherently bad GTG performance though

maybe in the future with a version that targets better response times, but nowadays the only IPS 144Hz panels are ones that are overclocked, and the refresh rate is there but since GTG is so poor it's almost worthless
22
#22
2 Frags +

Also the difference between 120 and 144hz for me is not noticeable at all, so I doubt that having 54hz more will make a difference for anyone.
Respond time on this monitor is pretty shit - it's like playing tf2 with 7 years old cpu but brand new powerful gpu - nosense. Not even going to say a word about the price.

Also the difference between 120 and 144hz for me is not noticeable at all, so I doubt that having 54hz more will make a difference for anyone.
Respond time on this monitor is pretty shit - it's like playing tf2 with 7 years old cpu but brand new powerful gpu - nosense. Not even going to say a word about the price.
23
#23
0 Frags +
yttriummodern VA and IPS have inherently bad GTG performance though

maybe in the future with a version that targets better response times, but nowadays the only IPS 144Hz panels are ones that are overclocked, and the refresh rate is there but since GTG is so poor it's almost worthless

Very true, poor speed, excellent color reproduction.

Speaking of overclockable panels. The Wasabi Mango UHD420 (ebay) is a 4k panel, for $800 ish that can be overclocked (reliably) to 120hz when downsized to 1080p, which is pretty nuts in itself. So theoretically if you wanted a big monitor for content consumption, and a monitor for casual ish pc gaming, you could just set your resolution lower and set it to not rescale your resolution up so it essentially is a lil 1080p 120 hz monitor surrounded by a sea of black bars ha.
Interesting in theory.

spammyAlso the difference between 120 and 144hz for me is not noticeable at all, so I doubt that having 54hz more will make a difference for anyone.

I have to disagree with you here from personal experience. If you see them next to each other, or are used to a certain refresh rate, the jumps are easily identifiable(from my experience), Both 120 - 144 and 144 to 160.

[quote=yttrium]
modern VA and IPS have inherently bad GTG performance though

maybe in the future with a version that targets better response times, but nowadays the only IPS 144Hz panels are ones that are overclocked, and the refresh rate is there but since GTG is so poor it's almost worthless[/quote]

Very true, poor speed, excellent color reproduction.

Speaking of overclockable panels. The Wasabi Mango UHD420 ([url=http://www.ebay.com/sch/items/?_nkw=Wasabi+Mango+UHD420&_sacat=&_ex_kw=&_mPrRngCbx=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_sop=12&_fpos=&_fspt=1&_sadis=&LH_CAds=&rmvSB=true]ebay[/url]) is a 4k panel, for $800 ish that can be overclocked (reliably) to 120hz when downsized to 1080p, which is pretty nuts in itself. So theoretically if you wanted a big monitor for content consumption, and a monitor for casual ish pc gaming, you could just set your resolution lower and set it to not rescale your resolution up so it essentially is a lil 1080p 120 hz monitor surrounded by a sea of black bars ha.
Interesting in theory.

[quote=spammy]Also the difference between 120 and 144hz for me is not noticeable at all, so I doubt that having 54hz more will make a difference for anyone.
[/quote]

I have to disagree with you here from personal experience. If you see them next to each other, or are used to a certain refresh rate, the jumps are easily identifiable(from my experience), Both 120 - 144 and 144 to 160.
24
#24
4 Frags +

Going from 144hz to 200hz for an extra $950 is really not worth it, and if you want to play on native resolution you might need to upgrade your parts so that's even more money

Going from 144hz to 200hz for an extra $950 is really not worth it, and if you want to play on native resolution you might need to upgrade your parts so that's even more money
25
#25
3 Frags +

The fov must be pretty sick with this though. would be fun to play with for a bit, although i couldn't see myself dropping $1200 on it. I doubt monitors such as this will ever become mainstream consumer grade products either.

The fov must be pretty sick with this though. would be fun to play with for a bit, although i couldn't see myself dropping $1200 on it. I doubt monitors such as this will ever become mainstream consumer grade products either.
26
#26
1 Frags +

Even if your monitor can display in 200Hz, what connection supports more than 144Hz @ 21:9?
For me it seems like it's something that is good on paper but you can't use it since you are limited or bottlenecked by other components, aka the connnection (HDMI, DVI or Dport)

Even if your monitor can display in 200Hz, what connection supports more than 144Hz @ 21:9?
For me it seems like it's something that is good on paper but you can't use it since you are limited or bottlenecked by other components, aka the connnection (HDMI, DVI or Dport)
27
#27
1 Frags +
wonderlandI don't understand the obsession with large monitors when u sit 2 feet away from it, its hard enough to see peripherals with an average lcd. at least for competitive gaming I don't think large monitors help at all. I'd buy a 200hz 24" (or smaller, I prefer smaller monitors than 24 tbh)

this one would be pretty sick for racing games I think. 12ms response time sounds disgusting but manufacturers lie about response time anyway, I highly doubt 24" 144hz asus or benq lcd is 1ms, they could just be telling the truth on this monitor lmao. anyways cool to see this but definitely not for me

& I would not trade the fw900 for this or anything atm pharoah^^

Typically speaking the 1ms gtg is measured at the top of the monitor and the gray level used vary heavily. That said both the asus and benq 144Hz montiors can get under 1ms gtg with some really low gray level to a very high gray level in the top 1/3 of the monitor.

-edit-
Also this thread reminded me to post a question to the blurbuster forums about monitor overclocking. If anyone here happens to know.
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2417

[quote=wonderland]I don't understand the obsession with large monitors when u sit 2 feet away from it, its hard enough to see peripherals with an average lcd. at least for competitive gaming I don't think large monitors help at all. I'd buy a 200hz 24" (or smaller, I prefer smaller monitors than 24 tbh)

this one would be pretty sick for racing games I think. 12ms response time sounds disgusting but manufacturers lie about response time anyway, I highly doubt 24" 144hz asus or benq lcd is 1ms, they could just be telling the truth on this monitor lmao. anyways cool to see this but definitely not for me

& I would not trade the fw900 for this or anything atm pharoah^^[/quote]

Typically speaking the 1ms gtg is measured at the top of the monitor and the gray level used vary heavily. That said both the asus and benq 144Hz montiors can get under 1ms gtg with some really low gray level to a very high gray level in the top 1/3 of the monitor.

-edit-
Also this thread reminded me to post a question to the blurbuster forums about monitor overclocking. If anyone here happens to know.
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2417
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.