Calibration, Gaming, Pricing, Conclusions
Calibration
Calibration of a monitor is something that very few gamers do but it can drastically improve the experience of using a new display in Windows. (Keep in mind that calibrations do NOT stay in place while gaming, so calibrations only apply to Windows environments.) The Acer XR341CK is actually decently calibrated out of the box, with a slight over-saturation on the yellow and green.
This is a report from dispcalGUI that shows the status of the monitor before our calibration process. They grey levels are solid, though you can definitely see the saturation in yellow and greens I mentioned above. Note that we put the monitor into its "sRGB" preset – an easy step that most users should take to get their new panels close to solid calibration levels.
After a 4 hour calibration process with our Spyder 4 colorimeter the color levels are nearly perfect and the 3440×1440 screen would be suitable for any professional and creative working environment.
This diagram shows the result in the typical XxY fashion – the color triangle represents the before-calibration result while the dashed line represents the final result.
Calibration Profile Download
The Windows color profile management interface is a bit of a mess, with the need to select and enable a profile in multiple layers of the interface. The best guide for loading and enabling a profile can be found over at TFTCentral. We used the following tools to generate our own calibration profile:
- Datacolor Spyder 4
- ArgyllCMS (calibration software suite)
- dispcalGUI (Graphical interface for Argyll CMS)
- HCFR (for additional verification and output graphs)
Our calibration profile was created using the lowest calibration speed in a dimly lit room. Here are the required settings if you wish to use our profile:
- User mode
- Brightness: 31
- Red: 50 (default)
- Green: 50 (default)
- Blue: 49
- Profile download: (HERE)
The above profile was created specifically for a color temperature target of 6500K at a luminance of 120 cd/m2 (nit). Gamma 2.2. Remember that the only way to get a correct calibration on your specific panel is by using a colorimeter on that very panel. The above settings and profile will only get *your* display to a perfect calibration if it has the exact same properties as our test sample. A perfect match is unlikely, but this should get you far closer to calibrated than just running with defaults.
Gaming Impressions
Obviously with support for AMD FreeSync, the Acer XR341CK is targeting the enthusiast PC gamer that wants the best display experience that exists in today's market. This isn't a 4K screen, but I actually think that will be seen as an advantage for many gamers.
The resolution of 3440×1440 creates an image of 4.9M pixels. A 4K resolution results in 8.29M pixels. Thus, a 4K resolution monitor would require a GPU to work on approximately 70% more pixels to get the same frame rate as the 3440×1440 monitor. That requires quite a bit more GPU horsepower, and likely pushes most users into the multi-GPU picture. It is much more likely that with whatever current GPU setup you have, you will have a better gaming experience with the Acer XR341CK or similar screen. Compared to a 2560×1440 monitor, this display has a 33% higher pixel count, so you will definitely see a performance hit on existing hardware.
Star Wars Battlefront at 3440×1440 – Click to Enlarge
Now, with the numbers discussion out of the way, what does it feel like to game on a 3440×1440 34-in screen? It's awesome. I had this panel in the office during the Star Wars Battlefront public beta and I can tell you that the feeling you get from an UltraWide screen, and definitely with a curved one, is very different than anything else in terms of single screen experiences. In many ways you are getting the benefits of Eyefinity with an UltraWide panel without the headaches of configuration in software, having bezels intersect your view, or extreme fish-eye effect on the far edges of the screen. All games should see benefits from the 3440×1440 resolution and I do think that for most people, this is the perfect resolution to balance productivity and cutting-edge gaming! (Some games might have issues outputting to 3440×1440, but newer titles should have support for it.)
The 75 Hz maximum refresh on the Acer XR341CK means that you can utilize the FreeSync capability for variable refresh rates (no tearing and no judder!) inside a fairly sizeable window: 32 FPS to 75 FPS. That is a range of 43 FPS/Hz and should allow users to configure games to stay within that window.
For now, GeForce user are left out in the cold as we are still waiting for the release of the G-Sync enabled variant of this panel. That model claims to support refresh rates as high as 100 Hz, but we'll wait until we have one in-studio for testing.
Pricing and Availability
The Acer XR341CK currently sells on Amazon.com for $1,039. That's a steep investment for any user but as I mentioned at the beginning of the review, monitors tend to last longer than any other component of a PC. Also, keep in mind that the panel is the final step in what you see and experience for gaming and productivity so it can't hurt to invest in one that is high quality and produces impressive gaming experiences unlike you have seen before.
Closing Thoughts
The more 21:9 monitors I use, the more I believe that most of our readers would be more happy with this aspect ratio than any other on the market. You need to have sufficient desk space for a 34-in wide display, but if you have it, an UltraWide monitor might be the perfect match for gamers looking to change things up. The Acer XR341CK is one of the best iterations of this aspect ratio I have ever used as well, combining a curved IPS screen with amazing color reproduction and viewing angles, a 3440×1440 resolution and AMD's FreeSync variable refresh rate technology. If you are a user of NVIDIA GeForce GPUs you will have to wait for another model. For AMD users, full steam ahead.
For AMD users that want FreeSync and the best tech in 21:9 displays
Thank you for your courage.
Thank you for your courage.
Tack on another 300 bucks for
Tack on another 300 bucks for gsync. UGH!!
How close are driver modders on getting freesync working on Nvidia cards?
“Free”sync not so “free”.
“Free”sync not so “free”.
Quit being a knucklehead.
Quit being a knucklehead. You know very well that is not what the ‘free’ is referring to.
But in case you conveniently forgot:
Two equivalent monitors side by side, one freesync and the other gsync. The gsync costs a fair amount more than the freesync version. It’s this price difference that freesync is referring to. As in, the freesync monitor is “free” of that price increase.
But that would make too much
But that would make too much sense. People stuck in fandom mode wouldn’t like that.
Probably because G-Sync works
Probably because G-Sync works that much better. Freesync is still struggling with that lower VRR window performance…
Who wants to game at, for
Who wants to game at, for example, 25 fps even with GSync? Those extra $200 that you pay for the GSync version can go in a better graphics card. They are enough to move you from a GTX 970 to a R9 Fury. So, instead of gaming at 25fps with a GTX 970 and having to depend on GSync to get a smooth 3D experience, you buy a Fury X and have a better experience at probably 35fps for example.
GSync is a one way road only for those who stay loyal to Nvidia hardware or want to make the best gaming setup with A SINGLE card. There a GTX 980Ti or a Titan X and $200 more for a GSync monitor, is the only option.
People don’t generally game
People don't generally game at 25, but as we've mentioned several times in the past, the issue is more of what happens when a game engine hitches and we get one or two frames drawn at a lower refresh rate. This can cause intermittent tearing or judder on non-GSync panels as the engine resumes from that hitch event.
Gsync version of this is
Gsync version of this is listed at the same price. So again Not “free” ass most AMD followers think what “free” means in the title.
You’re a liar and whats even
You’re a liar and whats even worse, a bad one.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824106002&cm_re=Acer_XR341CKa-_-24-106-002-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009869&cm_re=acer_g-sync-_-24-009-869-_-Product
newegg is just an example.
did you follow FreeSync from
did you follow FreeSync from the very beginning? do you know whay AMD specifically choose the word “Free” to begin with? i know some people like to think that the “free” means free licensing to monitor maker. but if you really follow FS from the very beginning you will know that is not the case. back when AMD actually showing FS in CES 2014 they even mention they might not take it into real product. so obviously that ‘free’ is not coming from free licensing to monitor maker. they specifically use the word free to jab nvidia solution which require new hardware back then (new gpu since it’s only available on kepler and above and of course new monitor). FS was free because there is no need to buy new gpu because AMD claim said technology already supported in their hardware for three generations (which leading to speculation that even 5k and 6k series might be possible to use FS)and no need to buy new monitor because all it needs was firmware update to make it work with current monitors.
If (and when) FreeSync is as
If (and when) FreeSync is as good as Gsync then Gsync will be out permanently. But as far as I can see Gsync is just better and people that pay 1000 for monitors don’t care about price anyway. AMD has budget gaming, NVidia has the high-end enthusiast crowd. And I followed the two links to those monitors on Newegg and the Gsync monitor is sold out! I might be a fanboy but I have my reasons……..
The GSync version costs
The GSync version costs $1299.
OH NOES! A review of a piece
OH NOES! A review of a piece of hardware that uses an AMD technology! BASH IT!
Does Witcher3 support this
Does Witcher3 support this res? Also Ryan does the osd save settings properly as per comment above? That’s a significant flaw if it doesn’t.
The Witcher 3 does support
The Witcher 3 does support that resolution, yah.
Yeah, he corrected himself and it seems to be working for him, above. I had no such issues.
Thanks for the review Ryan.
Thanks for the review Ryan. I got this panel last week and for the most part it’s awesome. Other than some games not supporting the resolution(Heros of the Storm is one). My biggest problem is when I change the settings in the OSD they don’t save after the monitor wakes from sleep or after I shut it off.
Update: The monitor I got was an open box item from amazon(their error wasn’t suppose to be). After I hit the reset option in the OSD everything seems to be working as it should. I’ll post another update if it happens again.
I see little reason to get
I see little reason to get this over a cheaper, larger, higher resolution 4k panel.
A few reasons to consider:
5
A few reasons to consider:
5 megapixels is easier to drive than 8
21.5:9 is really engaging for all kinds of games
Good for 21.5:9 movies – 100% viewing area
Still falls back to a 27″ 2560×1440 when used 16:9
You have to try one for at least a whole day.
The 4k (assuming around 40″,
The 4k (assuming around 40″, which you can get cheaper than this) is even wider than this thing, both in terms of pixels and physical size. So even if you think that vertical resolution is irrelevant, 4k will still get you even more horizontal room to play with for ultrawide content, as well as the option for far more vertical room when needed. 3440×1440 would be a perfectly good option if priced between 2560×1440 and 4k (and closer to 2560), but as it stands, with prices exceeding those of 4k, you can get a monitor which does everything this one does, and more, for less money.
As far as I know 4K monitors
As far as I know 4K monitors only come in 16:9 format like HD TV’s, I never heard of a 4K ultra wide. If so I would imagine it would be a beast to drive and cost a fortune to purchase.
Seriously I don’t get it
Seriously I don’t get it what’s the point of this resolution. If you want big go 4K (or 3.9K because full 4K is over 4000 px). If not – 1440/1600p. Firm believer that best aspect ratio (and I’m with Allyn on this one) is 16:10. Unfortunately manufacturers charge outrageous $$$ for that kind of stuff, so 1440 it is.
“Firm believer that the best
“Firm believer that the best aspect ratio is 16:10” So you are honestly believing that one specific aspect ratio is best for every purpose or situation, I’m sorry but thats just stupid.
I refused to accept 16:9 for
I refused to accept 16:9 for ages. That is part of why I wouldn’t replace my 16:10 30″ Apple Cinema Display. I wasn’t going to replace a five year old display that was gorgeous and performed fantastically for a shitty 16:9 like some fucking peasant. Like some plebe who probably refers to resolutions with a single dimension and tags a “p” onto the end of them, redundantly.
I mean, 16:9 are by and for total pieces of shit!
But then I got a 16:9 and was like “oh, actually, I don’t care — in fact, the horizontal space is a bit more important than extra vertical space.. especially at this screen size, where it just means I have to move my head up and down a bunch more”.
I mean, I’m always happy for more pixels, but . . . it really isn’t the end of the world at all.
4:3 FOREVER!!!
So there!
4:3 FOREVER!!!
So there!
hey i wanted to ask this for
hey i wanted to ask this for a long time to PCPer, please consider this question :
is there anyone (a company like ASUS, Acer, DELL, or hell even Nixeus) even trying to build a 24″ 1080p 144Hz IPS G-SYNC/FreeSync monitor under 300$-350$?
G-SYNC / FreeSync either would work because we all know that in 2016 AMD and nVidia both would have tremendously powered GPUs that could easily overpower a 1080p screen which would cost less than 300$ !!!
Yes, but 21:9 gives you 44 %
Yes, but 21:9 gives you 44 % more horizontal video rendering where as the 16:10 only gives you about 11% more vertical and no increase in horizontal.
The lights under the monitor
The lights under the monitor will be useful in a dark room when using a keyboard close to the screen, that doesn’t have LED illumination. In any other case I hope they have the option to turn them off.
Yeah they can be turned off /
Yeah they can be turned off / change brightness. Totally agree though, that's a great use case (keyboard lighting).
Nice looking monitor but that
Nice looking monitor but that the only thing about it….
I’d be down for this if it
I’d be down for this if it had GSync.
Also, a thousand bucks for a monitor of this size is *nothing*, with IPS.
I mean, shit, until my ASUS ROG Swift this year, my last four monitors over the previous dozen years were all Apple Cinema Displays (the 23″ when that was the biggest, then the 30″ ones when those were). I think, including taxes, I must have dropped $9,000 or so on those four displays…!
Here
http://www.newegg.com/Pr
Here
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009869&cm_re=acer_g-sync-_-24-009-869-_-Product
It only costs $200 more.
hey i wanted to ask this for
hey i wanted to ask this for a long time to PCPer, i know this a “storage” area but, please consider this question :
is there anyone (a company like ASUS, Acer, DELL, or hell even Nixeus) even trying to build a 24″ 1080p 144Hz IPS G-SYNC/FreeSync monitor under 300$-350$?
G-SYNC / FreeSync either would work because we all know that in 2016 AMD and nVidia both would have tremendously powered GPUs that could easily overpower a 1080p screen which would cost less than 300$ !!!
It is a pity that at the time
It is a pity that at the time of entry FreeSync monitors, all the reviewers focused on comparing AMD and Nvidia technology. In all the hustle and bustle of the most important fact has been overlooked. Because of the price, G-Sync is not attractive for owners of low-cost systems, which is where it is most useful. The average user of NVidia card, always will prefer to buy the higher-end card, than pay the $ 200-300 for the monitor. In contrast, an expensive card holders (with default high in-game fps) do not gain much. Quite different is the situation in the case of AMD cards. Because the price of the FreeSync monitors does not require additional investment, this is an excellent investment for owners of less expensive cards from AMD, where normally fps in games drops below 60 Hz.
BTW. I am the owner of
BTW. I am the owner of cheaper LG 34um67 monitor with an aspect ratio 21:9 and FreeSync (EDID modified to the range (30-75Hz). Experience in demanding games – Witcher3, Star Citizen AC – is amazing, although the resolution is only 2560×1080. Certainly, I will never go back to standard 16:9 monitor and a lack of Sync technology.
How did you get the range
How did you get the range down to 30?
got one as well would love to know
Would have loved some game
Would have loved some game test results at this resolution. Disappointing Ryan didn’t put the time in. I bet he played Star Wars on a nVidia GPU too.
I have this monitor and the
I have this monitor and the screen does’t scale to each end, top-bottom and more clearly, left and right (the sides).
I notice the monitor in this review does not do it either. The crimson drivers for AMD GPU scaling does not seem to do anything.
Does anyone know what gives here? There are no other settings that allow overscanning and what not. And like I said, the ones that do, don’t change a thing.
Advice?