Aoc agon ag352ucg обзор


Обзор монитора AOC AGON AG352UCG6 (35", 3440x1440, 120 Гц, MVA, G-Sync)

Обзор и тестирование монитора AOC AGON AG352UCG6

Для полного погружения в игровой мир требуется соответствующий монитор — большая диагональ, реалистичные цвета, качественное изображение без разрывов. Конечно, такие решения стоят достаточно дорого, да и система должна быть на уровне, ведь обеспечить достойный фреймрейт в большом разрешении — это вам не шутки. Сегодня мы поговорим об огромном 35″ изогнутом мониторе AOC серии AGON, который характерен не только высоким разрешением (3440×1440), но и частотой обновления 120 Гц. А чтобы полностью убрать всевозможные разрыва изображения, производитель реализовал в нём модуль G-Sync. Но что самое интересное — ценник за такой вариант, как оказалось, достаточно лояльный. Что из всего этого вышло — узнаем по мере тестирования!

Стоимость AOC AGON AG352UCG6 в московской рознице на момент публикации материала составляет от 63000 рублей.

Поставляется AOC AGON AG352UCG6 в достаточно большой коробке, с обеих сторон которой присутствуют идентичные изображения — производитель демонстрирует сам монитор с обеих сторон и выделяет его ключевую особенность — поддержку технологии G-Sync от NVIDIA.

Основные технические характеристики Диагональ: 35″ Разрешение: 3440х1440 Соотношение сторон: 21:9 Частота обновления: 120 Гц Панель: MVA Время отклика: 4 мс Подсветка: WLED Яркость: 300 кд/м² Контраст: 2500:1 Видеовходы: HDMI 1.4, DisplayPort 1.2 USB: два USB 3.0 Аудио: два динамика по 2 Вт, выход на наушники 3.5 мм

Подставка в коробке поставляется в разобранном виде, но собрать конструкцию воедино – одной минуты.

Комплект поставки включает в себя: — диск с инструкцией и драйверами; — кабель HDMI; — кабель DisplayPort; — силовой кабель и адаптер питания; — 3.5 мм аудио кабель;

Жаль, что фотография не передаёт впечатляющие размеры монитора — перед нами огромная 35″ панель, заключённая в чёрный корпус и установленная на стильную с долей агрессивности подставку.

В нижнюю часть корпуса встроена подсветка, обладающая мягким и ненавязчивым свечением.

Перед нами 35-дюймовый дисплей с соотношением сторон 21:9 и сдержанным радиусом кривизны – 2000 мм.

В отличие от некоторых других моделей AGON, у новинки подставка выполнена в чёрном цвете, что прекрасно сочетается с дизайном монитора в целом.

Обратная сторона уже нам знакома по другим актуальным моделям AGON и таит в себе интересный дизайнерский ход.

В неё встроена светодиодная подсветка, настроить которую можно через меню настроек.

Справа находится интересное решение – специальный держатель для наушников.

Сзади по центру реализованы: — HDMI; — DisplayPort; — 3.5 аудио разъём; — разъём для подключения адаптера питания.

Несколько левее находятся пара USB 3.0 портов и ещё пара 3.5 мм аудио разъёмов. Меню выполнено в классическом стиле, свойственном для большинства мониторов любых производителей. Ранее оно представляло собой тонкую полоску с горизонтальной прокруткой. В новом исполнении меню заметно удобнее, но если вы часто использовали другие мониторы, то сначала будет непривычен тот факт, что при нажатии на джойстик монитор выключается, а не применяет настройку. Но это дело привычки — раз 10-15 выключите монитор, а потом будете более внимательным. В первом разделе находятся настройки яркости, контраста, гаммы и другие.

Следующий раздел содержит в себе настройку цвета.

Настройка самого меню.

Некоторые другие настройки, включая управление подсветкой.

Тестирование

Взглянем на равномерность подсветки. Идеальной её назвать нельзя, но не забываем, что перед нами большая изогнутая панель, для которой это достаточно хороший результат.

Максимальное отклонение яркости зафиксировано на отметке 13%. Для изогнутых панелей это ещё хорошо, бывает и 25-30% отклонения. Так что в нашем случае это очень хороший результат.

Что касается равномерности цвета, то максимальное отклонение DeltaE составило 3.9, что достаточно неплохо.

Проверить значения гаммы мы решили во всех трёх режимах. Режим 1 — измеренное значение составило ровно 2.0.

Режим 2 — измеренное значение 1.8.

И режим 3 — получено значение 2.2. Во всех случаях получены очень точные результаты.

При выбранных нами настройках дисплей соответствует sRGB на 99.0 % и AdobeRGB на 75.2%.

Но что касается отклонений цветопередачи, то мы получили такие результаты. Напомним, что очень хорошими результатами являются показатели отклонения DeltaE (среднее значение) менее единицы, а максимальное отклонение DeltaE – менее трёх.

Сначала – проверка при пользовательских настройках — контраст 50, гамма 2.2, R/G/B — 50/50/50. Среднее отклонение DeltaE составило 2.03, максимальное – 5.12. В целом, такие результаты достаточно хороши.

Профиль «sRGB». Среднее отклонение DeltaE составило 2.62, максимальное – 4.95.

Профиль «Normal» Среднее отклонение DeltaE составило 2.05, максимальное – 3.52.

Калибровка исправила ситуацию с некорректными цветами и теперь у нас перед глазами уже правильная картина, где среднее отклонение DeltaE составило 0.34, а максимальное – 2.39.

Скачать данный профиль можно прямо с нашего сервера: AG352UCG6. Конечно, двух совершенно одинаковых матриц в мире не существует, но изображение с данным профилем станет немного лучше. Теперь перейдём к тестированию в играх. В Skyrim Special Edition изображение чёткое, реалистичное и радует глаз натуральностью происходящего в игровом мире.

При взгляде со стороны можно заметить небольшое падение контрастности по всему экрану.

Тоже самое и с другой стороны. Но критичным это назвать нельзя.

Посмотрим солнечный Far Cry 3.

При взгляде со стороны изображение совсем немного меняется по всей панели.

Аналогично и с другой стороны.

И возьмём ещё Doom 2016. Даже в тёмных сценах нельзя сказать, что заметна неравномерность подсветки. Но если на экране будет чёрное изображение, то от этого никуда не деться.

При повороте экрана картинка становится менее насыщенной.

И с другой стороны тоже самое.

Достоинства и недостатки

Достоинства: — высокое качество изображения; — хорошая равномерность подсветки; — поддержка 120 Гц и NVIDIA G-Sync;

— стильный внешний вид с ненавязчивой подсветкой;

Недостатки: — не выявлены;

Особенности: — не подходит для ультра динамичных сетевых игр из-за не самой быстрой матрицы.

Заключение

AOC AGON AG352UCG6 — монитор для владельцев высокопроизводительных игровых систем, который характерен изображением очень высокого качества, поддержкой частоты обновления 120 Гц и наличием модуля G-Sync, а также современным и несколько агрессивным внешним видом, подчёркнутым подсветкой с обеих сторон корпуса. Для обеспечения максимального комфорта и погружения требуется действительно производительная система на базе видеокарты NVIDIA — модуль G-Sync, разумеется, работает только с GeForce. Ну а получить свыше сотни в кадров в секунду при разрешении 3440×1440 тоже не каждой видеокарте по силам. Но если вы владелец навороченного ПК, то данный монитор может стать прекрасным выбором практически для всех игр, кроме самых динамичных — для них, всё-таки, рассмотреть мониторы на IPS панелях. Но это актуально для высокоскоростных сетевых баталий, для офлайн сражений AOC AGON AG352UCG6 подойдёт без оговорок. Что же касается цены, то совсем недавно цифры были 6-значными, а герой данного материала стоит гораздо меньше и действительно отрабатывает свои деньги по полной!

greentechreviews.ru

Обзор AOC AGON AG352UCG6. Игровой 35-дюймовый монитор с NVIDIA G-SYNC и 120Гц

С серией AGON у AOC мы уже знакомились на примере сразу нескольких моделей, и как показала практика этих тестов, мониторы действительно хороши для тех, кто не приемлет компромиссы при выборе игровой модели. Этим же правилам следует и тестируемая сегодня новинка AOC AGON AG352UCG6 с 35-дюймовой MVA-матрицей. К игровым эту модель относит поддержка частоты обновлений до 120 Гц и технология NVIDIA G-SYNC. Помимо этого, из особенностей стоит выделить изогнутую матрицу, подсветку и крючок под наушники.

К моменту публикации монитор уже можно приобрести в российских магазинах, список актуальных предложений представлен в таблице, составленной на основе данных сервиса Яндекс.Маркет.

Комплектация

Поставляется в массивной эффектной коробке с описанием общих параметров его работы. Комплект включает разборную подставку, кабель HDMI, кабель DisplayPort, силовой кабель, аудиокабель.

Внешний вид

Выглядит монитор внушительно, особенно если ранее был опыт только с распространенными 24- и 29-дюймовыми моделями. Наличие изогнутой матрицы в AOC AGON AG352UCG6 улучшает восприятие выводимой на 35-дюймовую панель информации. Показатель изогнутости тут 2000.

Перед началом эксплуатации нужно будет собрать самостоятельно подставку. Дизайн ее хорошо узнаваем. Трехлучевое основание и массивная стойка.

Есть возможность изменения высоты расположения панели, можно наклонять панель в стороны. Стоит на ровной поверхности устойчиво.

На обратной стороне серебристая вставка с четырьмя подсвечиваемыми зонами. По центру логотип производителя.

Цвет подсветки меняется в настройках. В ночное время создается эффект фоновой подсветки, выглядит интересно. Причем, эта часть удачно дополнена подсвечиваемыми вставками снизу.

Есть поворотный крючок, который можно использовать для хранения своих игровых наушников.

Изображение в AOC AGON AG352UCG6 можно подать через DisplayPort или HDMI. На панели разъемов силовой разъем и аудиоразъем.

На противоположной стороне вход для USB-хаба, два USB-выхода, и два аудиовыхода.

Рамки вокруг экрана равной ширины. На нижней рамке логотип серии. Поверхность полуматовая.

Установлена 35-дюймовая MVA-матрица с разрешением 3440 на 1440 пикселей. Максимальная частота обновления до 120 Гц. Встроен модуль G-SYNC.

Настройки

Меню содержит весь необходимый набор опций с регулировками контрастности, яркости, цветового баланса, настройками теней. Можно выбирать пресеты гаммы, разгонять и активировать игровой режим.

Отдельная вкладка под управление подсветкой. Здесь же можно будет активировать для одного из USB режим улучшенной зарядки.

AOC AG352UCG6 - 348 cd/m2 AOC AG352UCG6 - 0.17 cd/m2 Изменение яркости под углом 45 градусов AOC AG352UCG6 – 53% AOC AG352UCG6 – 6157K Данные получены в стандартном режиме при яркости 100 и контрасте 50. AOC AG352UCG6 – 343K Задержка, светлые тона – 2.4ms Задержка, темные тона – 7.5ms AOC AGON AG352UCG6 станет хорошим выбором для владельцев флагманских видеокарт NVIDIA или тех, кто уже планирует к приобретению RTX 2080 и RTX 2080 Ti. Стоит понимать, что 4К-разрешение с частотой 120 кадров в играх потянет далеко не каждая система. Нам понравились качество выводимого изображения, цветопередача, эффектный дизайн, использование изогнутой матрицы, равномерность подсветки по всей площади и возможность управления с меню самого монитора.

Комментарии и отзывы AOC AGON AG352UCG6

megaobzor.com

Обзор AOC Agon AG352UCG6

Во главе элитных игровых мониторов.

Вердикт: Это прекрасный игровой монитор, который позволит вам почувствовать, что вы находитесь в гуще событий во время игры, он полон фантастических функций, которые делают его достойным дополнением к любому игровому оборудованию. Обзор AOC Agon AG352UCG6 далее…

  • Плюсы: Приятная панель | Функции | Твердое телосложение;
  • Минусы: Болезненная цена | Не самая резкая картинка;

Представьте себе идеальный игровой монитор. Оптимизированный отклик и скорость изображения, но всё ещё практичный для ежедневных задач. Не какой-нибудь денежный мешок с функциями, которые вы никогда не будете использовать, а монитор, который делает всё то, что важно. Вы можете представить себе 35-дюймовую модель сверхширокоформатного соотношения 21:9, с плавным изгибом, высокой частотой обновления и технологией переменного обновления.

Читайте: Лучшие игровые мониторы 2019 года

Вы также сможете отдельно управлять максимизацией плотности пикселей для повышения качества картинки и ограничением количества пикселей, чтобы выйти на максимальную частоту кадров. Представили? В этом случае вы получаете нечто похожее на AOC Agon AG352UCG6. AOC когда-то был известным поставщиком бюджетных ЖК-панелей. Хорошо, благодаря корпоративному родству с Philips, производитель получил доступ к технологиям влиятельного бренда, но даже тогда сложно представить AOC в роли лидера.

Характеристики AOC Agon AG352UCG6:

  • Цена: 1039$ (67500р + НДС);
  • Размер панели: 35-дюймовый (1800R);
  • Родное разрешение: 3440 х 1440 пикселей;
  • Плотность пикселей: 106,5 пикселей на дюйм;
  • Тип панели: MVA;
  • Максимальная частота обновления: 120 Гц;
  • Отклик: 4 мс;
  • Контрастность: 2500:1;
  • Входы: HDMI 1.4, DP 1.2;
  • Крепление VESA: 100 мм;
  • Гарантия: 3 года;

Всё это было тогда. Теперь под брендом AOC Agon приходит достойный конкурент продуктам ASUS ROG и мониторам Acer Predator. AG352UCG6 легко переигрывает конкурентов на бумаге. В основе монитора лежит 35-дюймовая панель с разрешением 3440 х 1440 пикселей, соотношением 21:9. Это делает его на дюйм больше популяризированного 34-дюймового форм-фактора для этого разрешения. Необычные решения продолжаются с выбором панели MVA, вместо более традиционной IPS-панели. MVA предлагает повышенный контраст и насыщенные цвета, но проигрывает в отделе углов обзора и отклика.

Последний параметр особенно важен в контексте игровой направленности этого монитора. Во-первых, он поддерживает частоту обновления до 120 Гц. Чтобы полностью использовать высокую скорость обновления и гарантировать максимально плавный отклик, AOC также использует технологию G-Sync от Nvidia. Набор премиальных функций продолжается полностью регулируемой подставкой, за исключением поворота, что может быть простительным упущением для большого широкоформатного монитора. Да, шасси включает в себя заднюю подсветку и программируемую настройку подсветки.

Первое впечатление вас тоже не разочарует. Эта панель имеет приятный внешний вид. На самом деле, изображение очень похоже на IPS-панель, никакого перенасыщения, характерного для VA. Тем не менее, уровни черного и контрастность становятся самыми сильными сторонами. Минус? Углы обзора не так велики, как на IPS-панелях.

На тестах, используемых для выявления отклонения цветов, панель не смогла конкурировать с IPS за стабильность изображения под острыми углами. Аналогично, когда речь заходит о сложной динамике в изображении, AOC далеко не соответствует последним HDR-мониторам и уж тем более Quantum Dot.

Ещё один незначительный недостаток – обновление в 120 Гц. По умолчанию экран поддерживает только 100 Гц. Включение 120 Гц потребует перехода в экранное меню для включения так называемого режима «Разгона». Управление в меню реализовано с помощью одного джойстика в нижней части нижней панели экрана, всё довольно сильно запутанно. Что ещё более важно, совершенно глупо включать разгон, чтобы получить доступ к тому, что рекламируется как основная функция. Предположительно, AOC считает, что разгон – это круто. Неплохо. Но это решение должно оставаться для режимов, которые выходят за рамки общей спецификации.

Тем не менее, в тестировании, способность к 120 Гц и G-Sync работают безупречно. После того, как вы переходите на 120 Гц и выше, вы не захотите возвращаться на 60 Гц. Конечно, вам нужна мощная и, следовательно, дорогая видеокарта, чтобы максимально использовать возможности обновления. Родной размер панели 3440 х 1440 пикселей, возможно, не так требователен, как полноценные 4К, но это всё ещё огромное количество пикселей (если быть точным, 4953600), которые нужно зажигать 120 раз в секунду.

Обзор AOC Agon AG352UCG6

Антон Зим

15.06.2019

8/10

Это прекрасный игровой монитор, который позволит вам почувствовать, что вы находитесь в гуще событий во время игры, он полон фантастических функций, которые делают его достойным дополнением к любому игровому оборудованию.

8 Overall Score

Это прекрасный игровой монитор, который позволит вам почувствовать, что вы находитесь в гуще событий во время игры, он полон фантастических функций, которые делают его достойным дополнением к любому игровому оборудованию.

www.howtablet.ru

AOC AG352UCG6

The video below shows the Lagom text, a mixed and a dark desktop background from various viewing angles. For the mixed desktop background you can see some shifts in colour and contrast that become more pronounced from steeper angles, but no ‘colour inversion’ as you’d see vertically on a TN model. The shifts in general are not as pronounced, either. The final section of the video, with the dark background, highlights ‘VA glow’ which blooms out from more extreme angles.

Interlace pattern artifacts

On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern or mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade.

We did not observe any dynamic interlace pattern artifacts, although we did observe fairly faint static interlace patterns on some shades. These shades appeared with faint horizontal bands of an alternating slightly lighter and slightly darker variant of the intended shade. This was only noticeable if the monitor was observed quite closely and easiest to spot on medium-light shades (smoke or fog in a game, for example). Sensitity varies, but these shouldn’t really catch the attention of most users from a normal viewing distance. We also observed some ‘flickering’ inversion artifacts when certain patterns were displayed. These aren’t all that uncommon, particularly on high refresh rate monitors. We occasionally noticed this when browsing certain websites that displayed certain patterns. We didn’t notice it when gaming except in a specific isolated example on BF1. The material texture on the top of the airship caused the monitor to flicker, as shown in the video below.

Responsiveness

Input lag

We used a small tool called SMTT 2.0 and a sensitive camera to compare the AG352UCG6’s latency with a range of screens of known latency. To help maximise accuracy, over 30 repeat readings were taken. Using the method, we measured 5.51ms (over 1/2 a frame @120Hz) of input lag. This value is influenced by the element of input lag you ‘feel’ (signal delay) and that which you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness). It indicates a low signal delay which shouldn’t bother even sensitive users. We can’t accurately measure input lag with G-SYNC active and doing its thing, unfortunately, but we did feel that input lag was very low with G-SYNC active in the variable refresh rate environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

In this article we explore the factors affecting PC monitor responsiveness. One of the key concepts explored is perceived blur, something that is contributed to not only by the monitor’s pixel responsiveness, but also the movement of our eyes as we track motion on the screen. Eye movement is generally the dominant cause of perceived blur on modern monitors, but pixel responsiveness also plays an important role. We also explore a method of capturing both elements of perceived blur, called pursuit photography is also introduced. This uses a moving camera to simulate eye movement and capture pixel responsiveness, giving a much more accurate representation of motion on a monitor than static photographs or videos which reflect pixel responsiveness alone.

The following images are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting. The test was set to run at its default speed of 960 pixels per second, which is a good practical speed for taking such photographs. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. All three rows of the test are looked at (dark background, medium background and light background) to help highlight how different shades affect the pixel response behaviour on this monitor. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 100Hz and 144Hz using all of its ‘Overdrive’ (OD) settings. We’ve also included some reference shots from the AG352UCG (this models predecessor), running its ‘Medium’ response time setting.

At 60Hz (above) the object itself appears relatively blurred and unfocussed, indicating significant perceived blur due to eye (camera) movement. There is also varying degrees of trailing behind the object, due to pixel response behaviour. With ‘OD’ set to ‘Off’ there is a bold and extended trail behind the object, particularly for the dark and to a fair extent medium background. The ‘Weak’ setting’ reduces this trail a fair bit, whilst the ‘Light’ setting makes little further improvement. The ‘Medium’ setting further reduces the extent of the trailing, but it is replaced with a bit of overshoot (inverse ghosting) This is most noticeable behind the yellow cockpit area of the UFO, with the trailing appearing fairly dark and shadowy. The behaviour here is quite similar to the older model used as a reference here. The ‘Strong’ setting ramps up the pixel overdrive significantly and creates a huge amount of overshoot, giving obvious bright and colourful inverse ghosting behind the object for all transitions but most noticeable for the dark and medium backgrounds. The image below shows the results at 100Hz.

At 100Hz (above) the UFO is significantly narrower and more sharply focused, indicating a significant reduction in perceived blur due to eye movement. There are again varying degrees of trailing behind the object. For the ‘Off’, ‘Weak’ and ‘Light’ settings behaviour is quite similar to at 60Hz. For the ‘Medium’ setting, fairly strong pixel overdrive is used. The overshoot behind the UFO is more pronounced. It’s somewhat stronger in comparison than on the reference shot, although conventional trailing is also reduced. The reference shot with the older model shows trailing that extends further back from the object (it appears as more of a ‘smear’ in motion), particularly for the dark and medium backgrounds. The ‘Strong’ setting gives obvious bright and colourful inverse ghosting, a bit less extensive than at 60Hz but still very obvious.

Stepping up to 120Hz (above) narrows the UFO further and gives a bit of an edge in detail (note the segments of the UFO body, for example). This difference is less pronounced than at 60Hz, but you’re talking about a step up of 20Hz rather than 40Hz here so that’s not surprising. This reflects a further decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. The trailing behind the object is largely similar to at 100Hz. It’s somewhat bolder in some cases and extends a bit further back. This is due to the faster frame rate and increased refresh rate, which demands faster pixel responsiveness and as mentioned reduces perceived blur so trailing is masked less. Focusing on the ‘Medium’ setting, there is a good reduction in the extent and boldness of trailing compared to weaker settings. The difference between 100Hz is slight and actually the overshoot looks to be somewhat lighter for the medium background. Looking at a broader range of transitions by testing games, we certainly favoured ‘Medium’ due to the snappier pixel response times. There were some more obvious examples of overshoot than captured for the transitions tested above, however. We also found the boost in refresh rate from 100Hz to 120Hz beneficial, as we explore in the proceeding section.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield 1 (BF1) the monitor provided a very fluid experience, where the frame rate kept up with the 120Hz refresh rate. The ‘connected feel’ was greatly aided by the combination of low input lag and fact that the monitor has half the frame delay of a 60Hz monitor at 60fps. In other words, it outputs potentially twice the visual information every second. As you interacted with the game world with your character, there was a certain connectedness between your movements of the mouse and movement of your character. A certain precision that is simply lacking on a 60Hz monitor regardless of input lag which we felt gave a real competitive edge to gameplay. The combination of increased refresh rate and frame rate also significantly reduced eye movement and hence greatly decreased perceived blur. As we explained earlier, pixel responses are also important, and we’ll come onto that in a little more detail shortly. But the monitor certainly looked and felt like it took very good advantage of the 120Hz refresh rate. Compared to its predecessor or indeed with this model set to 100Hz, that extra 20Hz did make a positive difference to both the ‘connected feel’ and reduced perceived blur.

In most cases the pixel responses were able to keep up with the 120Hz refresh rate and provide a pretty much optimal experience. There were some weaknesses in pixel responsiveness, though, which is expected to a degree on any VA panel. There were some transitions that were a bit slower than optimal, giving a thin ‘powdery trail’ in places. This generally occurred between lighter and medium shades and was akin to the slight weaknesses you might see on high refresh rate IPS-type panels. Using our preferred ‘Medium’ response time setting, there was no extensive ‘smeary’ trailing nor any heavy powdery trailing. In that sense this model was improved over the predecessor, where transitions involving darker shades tended to highlight these sorts of weaknesses quite readily. There was some ‘break-up’ trailing whereby some very dark shades appeared to separate out into some of the constituent hues (for example dark red or purple), which leached out in a somewhat colourful way. This was not particularly eye-catching or extensive and was clearly reduced compared to the older model or this model using a lower response time setting than ‘Medium’.

The conventional VA weaknesses such as more noticeable trailing, smearing and ‘break-up’ trailing were not significantly reduced by pixie dust, however. Quite strong pixel overdrive was used, resulting in a moderate amount of overshoot (inverse ghosting). There were some ‘snail-slime’ semi-transparent trails in places that were like a brighter blend of the background and object shades. There were some brighter ‘halo’ trails in places which appeared as a brighter shade than either the object and background colour. And some dark trails in places, appearing darker than either the object or background colour. These were readily observed with brighter objects moving against a foggy or smoky background, for example. Although we found this overshoot noticeable, particularly when we were looking for it, we did not find it obnoxious enough to distract us from gameplay. By way of comparison, the overshoot was fairly similar to what you might see on your typical BenQ XL series model with ‘AMA’ set to ‘High’ and to the ‘Normal’ response time setting on the Dell S2716DG (which we use as one of our reference monitors for responsiveness). Sensitivity to overshoot varies, but in general we feel most users will find this moderate overshoot preferable to the alternative of more obvious ‘smeary’ and heavy powdery trailing. It allows the monitor to maintain strong 120Hz performance, giving an overall level of perceived blur that’s lower than you’d typically see on a 120Hz VA model. The section of the video review below highlights some of the strengths and weaknesses in the monitor’s response performance.

Given the depth of analysis on BF1 above and the fact that these strengths and weaknesses broadly apply to any game title, we don’t have much to add using other game examples. Still, we like to mix things up a little and at least give a passing mention to Dirt Rally, a game from a clearly different genre. The monitor again put its 120Hz refresh rate to good use, delivering a good low level of perceived blur and excellent ‘connected feel’. We wouldn’t say this made us supremely good at the game and it’s no substitute for practice, but we can certainly see that avid racing fans would appreciate this sort of performance. Most of the pixel transitions were performed flawlessly or with only minor weaknesses, such as very light powdery trailing or a little overshoot. Where some darker shades were involved in the transitions, though, the slight ‘break-up’ trailing and moderate overshoot sometimes came into play. These sorts of transitions were more widespread when driving at night, for example, but we didn’t observe anything too extreme or eye-catching. We also analysed responsiveness on our Blu-ray test titles. These were limited to ~24fps, so the fluidity of the action was greatly limited. Nonetheless, there were no obvious weaknesses in terms of pixel responsiveness and juddering was decreased compared to a 60Hz model due to 24fps dividing evenly into 120Hz. There was a small amount of overshoot here in there, but it was effectively masked by the low frame rate and didn’t jump out at all. Higher frame rate film content (for example 60fps) highlighted some of the weaknesses we observed when gaming, such as some more noticeable overshoot in places. But we still found such content perfectly watchable and didn’t find the monitor provided any distracting responsiveness issues there.

G-SYNC – the technology and activating it

Nvidia G-SYNC is a variable refresh rate technology that can be activated when a compatible Nvidia GPU is connected to a compatible monitor (such as the AOC AG352UCG6). Our article on the technology explores the principles behind the technology and its benefits, so we won’t be repeating too much of that. Essentially the technology allows the monitor to dynamically adjust its refresh rate to match, where possible, the frame rate outputted by the GPU. When the two are in sync it gets rid of the tearing (VSync off) and stuttering (VSync on) that occurs when the two are desynchronised. An additional benefit for those who hate tearing and usually like to use VSync is a reduction in latency compared to ‘VSync on’ in the variable frame rate environment. As noted in the responsiveness section, though, we don’t have a way to accurately measure this.

This monitor supports G-SYNC via DP 1.2 (DisplayPort), once connected to a compatible Nvidia GPU such as the GTX 1070 on our test system. Once connected up, G-SYNC should be automatically configured and ready to use. There’s usually even a little notification icon in the system tray telling you that a G-SYNC compatible display is detected. To check everything is configured correctly, open Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Set Up G-SYNC’. Ensure that the checkbox for ‘Enable G-SYNC’ is checked, then select your preferred operating mode. As the image below shows, this technology works in both ‘Full Screen’ and ‘Window’ modes, provided the correct option is selected for this. If the G-SYNC options seem to be missing from Nvidia Control Panel, this may be remedied by reconnecting the GPU or possibly connecting the monitor to a different DP output if there’s one available. If the options are still missing, reinstalling the GPU driver or updating this is recommended.

Next you should navigate to ‘Manage 3D settings’. Here there are a few settings of interest, the first of which is ‘Monitor Technology’. This should be set to ‘G-SYNC’ as shown below. Assuming this is all set up correctly, you should also see ‘G-SYNC’ written beside the resolution and refresh rate at the bottom of the OSD. Note that the refresh rate listed there indicates the static refresh rate you’ve selected and does not dynamically change according to frame rate (and hence the current refresh rate of the monitor).

The second setting of interest is VSync, which can be set to one of the following; ‘On’, ‘Use the 3D application setting’, ‘Off’ or ‘Fast’ (GPU dependent). The AOC supports a variable refresh rate range of 30 – 120Hz, with the maximum value (ceiling) corresponding to the refresh rate you’ve selected for the monitor in Windows. That means that if the game is running between 30fps and 120fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 120fps, the monitor will stay at 120Hz and the GPU will respect your VSync setting in the graphics driver. If you select ‘On’, VSync activates if the frame rate exceeds the static refresh rate that you’ve selected (e.g. 120Hz / 120fps) and the usual VSync latency penalty applies. If you select ‘Off’ then the frame rate is free to rise in an unrestricted way, but the monitor will only go as high as 120Hz – tearing and juddering will ensue if the frame rate rises above this. The ‘Use the 3D application setting’ largely works as you’d expect, but the general recommendation is to set VSync in the graphics driver if you wish to use it as in-game implementations can interfere with the smooth operation of G-SYNC. Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set several frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 116fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate.

The ‘Fast’ option is available on some newer GPUs, such as the GTX 1070 used in our test system. This enables a technology called ‘Fast Sync’, which only applies above the refresh rate and frame rate ceiling (>120Hz / 120fps). Below this G-SYNC operates as normal, whereas above this a special version of VSync called ‘Fast Sync’ is activated. This is a GPU rather than monitor feature so isn’t something we will explain in detail, but it is designed to reduce tearing at frame rates well above the refresh rate of the monitor. If you’re interested in this technology, which may be the case if you play older or less graphically demanding games at very high frame rates, you should watch this section of a video by Tom Petersen.

If the frame rate drops below the lowest refresh rate supported by the monitor (i.e. the G-SYNC floor of 30Hz / 30fps) then the monitor sets its refresh rate to a multiple of the frame rate. This occurs regardless of VSync setting. If for example the game ran at 20fps, the monitor would set itself to 40Hz. This keeps stuttering and tearing from the usual frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. As we explore shortly, though, low frame rates are low frame rates regardless of the technology. So whilst it is always beneficial to have stuttering and tearing removed, it’s also beneficial to have an elevated frame rate where possible. It’s also worth remembering that G-SYNC can’t eliminate stuttering caused by other issues on the system or game environment such as insufficient RAM or network latency.

G-SYNC – the experience

We played various game titles with G-SYNC active and found the experience much the same across all of them. Because of this and because it has tremendous flexibility in its graphics options, we’ll simply be focussing on Battlefield 1 (BF1). With the graphics options set to fairly modest settings, which we feel give a good mixture of image quality and performance on our GTX 1070, things rarely stayed at 120fps. There were frequent dips below this, sometimes into the high double-digits. Without G-SYNC active this would result in obvious (to us – sensitivity varies amongst individuals) tearing if VSync was off or stuttering if VSync was on. The technology worked its magic to smooth things out, making the experience far more pleasant. We still preferred the edge in ‘connected feel’ and decreased perceived blur provided by frame rates being on the upper end of this range, ideally at or close to 120fps. But for users such as ourselves who are sensitive to tearing and stuttering, the benefits of variable refresh rate technology can’t be understated.

If we increased the graphics settings further, frame rate dipped potentially much lower. Using the ‘Ultra’ preset, for example, often saw the frame rate dip to around 50 – 60fps. This felt distinctly different to significantly higher frame rates, with the ‘connected feel’ much worse and perceived blur levels increased significantly. Nonetheless, the lack of tearing or stuttering from frame rate and refresh rate mismatches was very welcome. For users who are sensitive to stuttering or tearing, it really becomes apparent how beneficial G-SYNC is once you disable it. But low frame rates remain low frame rates, so ideally you’d stay as far away from them as you can. This became increasingly apparent as frame rate dropped further. If we increased the ‘Resolution scale’ slider, we could easily cause frame rate to drop much lower and potentially below the 30fps (30Hz on the monitor) floor of operation. As covered in the previous section, the monitor sticks to a multiple of the frame rate with its refresh rate under such conditions. This kept tearing and stuttering at bay. Unlike on many FreeSync models, overshoot didn’t become more of an issue as frame rate dropped and seemed to be ‘re-tuned’ to various refresh rates quite effectively. We did not observe any flickering outside of points we’d normally see some on models with variable refresh rate models, for example where frame rate drops to extremely low values such as in some cutscenes or menus.

The 35” 3440 x 1440 curved ‘UltraWide’ experience

We’ve got a dedicated article looking at the 3440 x 1440 resolution and 21:9 aspect ratio using a 34” screen as an example. The 35” screen here is only marginally larger so changes very little about this experience. We therefore won’t be repeating a lot of what was said in the article. The AG352UCG6 does throw in an extra consideration, and that is the 1800-2000R curve. This is a moderate curve and can appear exaggerated in photos and videos. Once you’re sitting in front of the screen and use it for a bit, though, the experience is very natural and one you quickly adapt to. There is some evidence that curved screens offer benefits in terms of viewing comfort – we certainly found this screen comfortable to use but couldn’t directly attribute that to the curved screen. For us it was the increase in immersion and subtle increase in depth that we found attractive. It is difficult to describe and something you really need to experience first hand to appreciate, but it just seems to draw you into the content a bit better without feeling in any way unnatural. On the desktop we didn’t find anything out of place of unnatural, either, and enjoyed the real-estate benefits of the large 3440 x 1440 screen. The images below demonstrate this real-estate and again exaggerate the curve. Whilst for general purpose use and entertainment use we see the curve as a benefit rather than a hindrance, we appreciate some users who require geometric perfection (CAD/CAM work etc.) could find it troublesome.

As per the previous paragraph, the screen size and curvature added some immersion to the experience. It simply ‘drew us in’ to the game environment a bit better without making the experience feel uncomfortable or alien. This effect is more pronounced with a curve of this sort of steepness (or more so if steeper) but also on a screen that’s this wide. The 21:9 aspect ratio also offers a good Field of View advantage in most titles, as explored in our article on the topic linked to previously. The images below, which again tend to exaggerate the curve, in no way indicate the image quality when observing the screen in person. They’re simply there to fire up your imagination and also demonstrate the screen in action with its 21:9 aspect ratio. The titles shown are, respectively; BF1, Dirt Rally and Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus.

Interpolation and upscaling

This monitor does not provide any scaling capability via DP, which is usual for G-SYNC models. PC users can instead use the scaling functionality of the GPU. It does provide basic scaling capability via HDMI, however. You can therefore connect AV devices such as games consoles (or a PC, if you need to) and run the monitor at a non-native resolution such as 1920 x 1080 (‘1080p’ Full HD). If you run the monitor at 1920 x 1080, it uses ratio scaling to maintain a 16:9 aspect ratio. More specifically, a 27” diagonal screen space is used along with 2560 x 1440 of its pixels – the remaining horizontal pixels are simply blacked out. An interpolation process is then used to map the source resolution onto those 2560 x 1440 active pixels. As a PC user, if you would want to ensure that the GPU is handling this scaling rather than the GPU, via HDMI, you need to configure the graphics driver correctly. For AMD GPU users this is automatically handled by the monitor when gaming, by default. Nvidia users should open the Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. They should ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown below.

Because interpolation is used to display 1920 x 1080 onto 2560 x 1440 pixels, there is a degree of softening compared to a native 27” Full HD display. This isn’t extreme and does allow the monitor to be used for console gaming as a secondary use. Note that the scaling functionality is fairly basic and you can’t set the monitor itself to run at custom resolutions like 2560 x 1440 or 2560 x 1080. You would need to use GPU scaling if you wish to use such resolutions, which works over both HDMI and DP. If you use GPU scaling for a 2560 x 1440 resolution with appropriate settings, the image will appear as a crisp and undistorted 27” WQHD (2560 x 1440). Be aware that GPU scaling can add additional latency. Discussion or testing of this is beyond the scope of this review, though, as it is down to the GPU rather than the monitor.

Video review

The video below summarises some of the key points raised in this written review and shows the monitor in action. The video review is designed to complement the written piece and is not nearly as comprehensive.

Timestamps: Features & Aesthetics Contrast Colour reproduction Responsiveness

Conclusion

For some users, the marriage of a large 21:9 UltraWide screen and strong contrast VA panel is very appealing indeed. Throw in a high refresh rate and support for a variable refresh rate technology such as Nvidia G-SYNC and things become even more attractive. The AOC AG352UCG6, the so-called ‘Black-Edition’ followup to the AG352UCG delivers this. Aesthetically it took on a similar form and overall design to its predecessor but replaced glossy black plastics with more subtle matte black plastics. And silver-coloured elements with black elements, including the robust-feeling fully adjustable stand. The RGB LED lighting feature underneath the bottom bezel and on the ‘wings’ at the rear are probably the flashiest most ‘gameresque’ elements on this thing, but they can be dimmed or turned off if preferred. Whilst the aesthetic changes don’t sound like much, we still appreciated the switch away from fingerprint, dirt and dust magnet glossy plastics. The 3440 x 1440 resolution, 35” screen size and 1800-2000R curve were of course all maintained. We found this combination provided a good level of immersion and gave a comfortable experience, with the curve drawing us into the experience just a little bit without feeling unnatural.

The image itself was quite similar to its predecessor. With a few simple tweaks in the OSD, the image had a rich and natural look. Gamma tracking was not quite at the ‘2.2’ target using any practical OSD settings, although was slightly closer than on the older model we tested. Regardless of this, the deviations were not extreme and didn’t significantly upset the image itself. The light matte screen surface didn’t impart heavy graininess onto the image, whilst the slight extension beyond sRGB gave an edge of vibrancy compared to models with less generous sRGB coverage (or over-coverage). There was a sliver of extra gamut measured compared to the older model, but the gamut doesn’t extend as far as on some models. For example, the Samsung C34F791, which extends further past the sRGB boundaries and has an extra dose of vibrancy. The 34” Samsung SVA panel also had slightly better colour consistency, maintaining saturation better towards the extremities of the screen compared to the 35” AMVA panel used here. Nonetheless, from a reasonable viewing distance we didn’t find the saturation losses to be extreme on this model.

The contrast performance was good overall, again similar to the older model. At ~2000:1, though, the static contrast was nothing to write home about for a VA model and is on the lower end of what you’d see from this panel technology. Nonetheless, it gave an edge over non-VA panel types. The ‘VA glow’ was more pronounced than on some models and there was some ‘black crush’ which affected the visibility of dark shades. Still, any detail loss of ‘atmosphere loss’ associated with both of these was much less significant than ‘IPS glow’ on a model of anywhere near this size. And also the vertical gamma shifts associated with TN technology. One area where this model was distinctly different from its predecessor was responsiveness. Input lag was similarly low, but the maximum refresh rate was boosted to 120Hz. There was also a noticeable increase to the level of grey to grey acceleration provided for the ‘Medium’ (optimal) pixel overdrive setting. This did give moderate overshoot, but also cut down on a lot of the ‘smeary’ trailing, heavy powdery trailing and ‘break-up’ trailing. It allowed the monitor to make good use of its 120Hz refresh rate, allowing it to put those extra 20Hz to good use and deliver the sort of reduction in perceived blur you’d hope for from a 120Hz model. Plus the good ‘connected feel’ to go with it, which was a step above 100Hz for sensitive users like ourselves. G-SYNC also worked as we’ve come to expect from our considerable experience with the technology, getting rid of pesky tearing and stuttering from frame rate and refresh rate mismatches.

Whilst we have been quite open about our preferences for the C34F791’s 34” SVA panel compared to the current 35” AMVA panels, we’ve seen the 35” panel put to very good use here. It doesn’t deliver same same level of vibrancy as some other models out there, but still delivers a rich experience with some nice touches of vibrancy here and there. The contrast performance is not astronomical but is still relatively good compared to non-VA LCDs. When you throw responsiveness into the mix plus support for Nvidia G-SYNC, it starts to look like quite a capable all-rounder. It’s also cheaper than competing IPS models, which have their own strengths and weaknesses to consider.

The bottom line; a responsive monitor with decent contrast and colour reproduction, a nice size and resolution and support for Nvidia G-SYNC – just make sure you don’t have an overshoot allergy first.

PositivesNegatives
A rich and natural look to the image following some basic OSD tweaks. Some extension beyond sRGB from the colour gamut delivers a bit of extra vibrancySome ‘sagging’ below ‘2.2’ for the gamma curve and some perceived gamma and saturation changes related to VA viewing angle weaknesses
Good static contrast, exceeding non-VA panels and a light matte screen surface that’s free from obvious graininessSlight ‘black crush’ and static contrast that’s significantly weaker than some VA models
Low input lag, a 120Hz refresh rate and strong pixel overdrive to make a good go of this – plus G-SYNC, which works as intendedSome slower than optimal pixel responses and moderate overshoot will not be to everyone’s liking
A good pixel density and practical resolution, an understated and generally agreeable design, good ergonomic flexibility and a curve to the screen that complements the performance without making the image appear unnaturalThe bezels are not the sleekest amongst modern monitors and not everyone will like the somewhat ‘chunky’ and robust aesthetic

Like our reviews? Please help support the website by purchasing your monitor or other computer peripherals and components using the link below. You should be automatically redirected to your nearest Amazon after clicking. If that’s not the case please visit this post to find a link for your preferred country. We greatly appreciate your support.

Donations are also greatly appreciated.

pcmonitors.info

AOC AG352UCG

The video below shows this text test alongside a mixed and a dark desktop background, from a range of viewing angles. For the dark desktop background you can see the ‘VA glow’ mentioned previously, as it blooms out from a variety of viewing angles.

Responsiveness

Input lag

We used a small tool called SMTT 2.0 and a sensitive camera to compare the AG352UCG’s latency with a range of screens of known latency. To help maximise accuracy, over 30 repeat readings were taken. Using the method, we measured 5.93ms (over 1/2 a frame @100Hz) of input lag. This value is influenced by the element of input lag you ‘feel’ (signal delay) and that which you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness). It indicates a fairly low signal delay which shouldn’t bother even fairly sensitive users. We can’t accurately measure input lag with G-SYNC active and doing its thing, unfortunately, but we did feel that input lag was very low with G-SYNC active in the variable refresh rate environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

In this article we take a detailed look at the factors which affect monitor responsiveness. One of the key concepts explored here is the idea of perceived blur, something that is contributed to not only by the monitor’s pixel responsiveness, but the movement of our eyes as we track motion on the screen. A method of capturing both elements called pursuit photography is also introduced. This uses a moving camera to simulate eye movement and capture pixel responsiveness, giving a much more accurate representation of motion on a monitor than static photographs or videos which reflect pixel responsiveness alone.

The following images are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting. The test was set to run at its default speed of 960 pixels per second, which is a good practical speed for taking such photographs. All three rows of the test are looked at (dark background, medium background and light background) to help highlight how different shades affect the pixel response behaviour on this monitor. The monitor was tested at both 60Hz and 100Hz, using all of its ‘Overdrive’ (OD) settings. Note that the monitor can also be set to 85Hz, with results some way between those for 60Hz and 100Hz as below. We’ve also included some reference shots to show how things should look where pixel responsiveness isn’t really a limiting factor. This is a Dell S2417DG, a fast TN model that offers very well-tuned pixel responsiveness at all refresh rates you can set it at.

At 60Hz there was significant blur on the object itself. It appeared relatively wide and soft. This reflects perceived blur due to eye (camera) movement and is the same as the reference 60Hz reference in that respect. With ‘OD’ set to ‘Off’ there was also a significant amount of bold trailing behind the object for the dark background and to a lesser extent the medium background. This reflects perceived blur due to slower than optimal pixel responses. The light background was unproblematic, however. Using the ‘Weak’ setting decreased this trailing, whilst ‘Light’ decreased it further. Using the ‘Medium’ setting provided a further reduction, although some overshoot (inverse ghosting) was introduced for the black background – visible as a dark trail behind the UFO cockpit. The ‘Strong’ setting introduced significant overshoot for the dark background with a colourful-looking inverted trail behind the object. Moderate overshoot was also introduced for the medium and light backgrounds using this setting.

At 100Hz the object appeared more sharply focused and thinner, indicating a significant reduction in perceived blur due to eye (camera) movement. The trailing due to pixel responsiveness followed a similar pattern to at 60Hz. With ‘OD’ set to ‘Off’ there was obvious bold trailing behind the UFO for the dark background in particular, but still a fair bit elsewhere. The ‘Weak’ setting reduced this whilst ‘Light’ reduced it further – although even there, a fairly bold trail was visible even for the medium cyan background. The ‘Medium’ setting reduced the trailing further, particularly for the medium background. There was a slightly ‘dirty’ look behind the UFO cockpit for the dark background – this is overshoot. The ‘Strong’ setting introduced obvious overshoot, this time most eye-catching for the medium background but still quite obvious elsewhere as well.

From this analysis and considering pixel responses over a broader range of transitions than analysed here, we felt that ‘Medium’ offered the best balance between conventional trailing reduction and overshoot. The ‘Light’ setting did cut down on overshoot, but it also introduced some more obvious trailing in places and some instances of fairly obvious smeary trailing that was avoided using the ‘Medium’ setting. It’s nice that AOC provides this sort of flexibility with their overdrive control, as some users may particularly dislike overshoot whilst others will prefer the reduction in conventional trailing. We think it’s really between the ‘Light’ and ‘Medium’ settings that most users will find themselves deciding between.

Interlace pattern artifacts

Some monitors, particularly with high refresh rates, suffer from certain artifacts when viewing motion on the screen. These may appear as an interference pattern or mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. There were no such issues on this monitor, however. There were some extremely faint static interlacing patterns visible on some shades, whereby they were shown as very faint bands of a slightly darker and slightly lighter variant of the intended shade. This could only be seen if the monitor was observed closely and the shade itself was static. This was far too faint for most users to notice during normal use or indeed from a normal viewing distance and is just something we have noted for completeness.

Responsiveness in games and movies

The monitor provided a fluid experience on Battlefield 1 (BF1), where the frame rate kept pace with its 100Hz refresh rate. By outputting up to 1.67 times as much visual information every second to the user as a 60Hz monitor, the ‘connected feel’ as we like to call it was very good. As you interact with your character on BF1, there is a certain level of precision and fluidity that’s simply lacking at lower refresh rates. The low input lag also aided this feeling. The increased refresh rate and frame rate output also significantly reduces eye movement, as explored earlier, and therefore reduces perceived blur significantly. The achilles heel of the VA panel type, though, is pixel responsiveness – which is the other important element of perceived blur. And in that respect the AOC coped surprisingly well. Many of its pixel transitions were performed about as quickly as they needed to be for optimal 100Hz performance, or were only slightly slower than optimal. This meant that there wasn’t generally a significant amount of trailing from slower than optimal pixel responses, just a bit of an extra ‘thin and powdery’ trail in places. Similar to what you’d see on models with high refresh rate IPS-type panels, like the ViewSonic XG2703-GS and ASUS PG348Q. This contrasts with most VA models, including some high refresh rate models like the Acer Z35, whereby there would be obvious and fairly widespread extended or ‘smeary’ trailing.

There were some weaknesses, though, which affected some specific pixel transitions. There was a bit of overshoot in places, particularly noticeable where very light shades were involved in the transition. Moving your character and observing the moon against the night sky, for example, produced a dark silhouette trail behind the moon. Observing in-game markers against a dusty desert background provided a fairly bright halo trail around the marker as well. This overshoot was not particularly obnoxious, although was a bit more noticeable than on the ASUS MX34VQ at 100Hz, for example. There were also some instances of ‘break-up trailing’, whereby trailing could be seen behind certain dark shades that was coloured with certain hues contained within the dark shades. In other words, the object itself might appear pretty much black and you might expect any trailing behind this to appear similar to the perceived object colour – but the object might also contain small traces of red or blue, for example. This appears to ‘bleed out’ of the object, a bit like ink being slightly smudged. As with overshoot, sensitivity to this varies and this was some of the more subdued ‘break-up’ trailing we’ve seen – there were no obvious flashes of colour or extended inky smears, just short sharp trails of different colour to either the object or background. Finally, there were a few transitions that occurred slowly enough to form ‘smeary’ trailing, with an almost smoke-like effect. This was not as widespread or obvious as the smeary trailing on some VA models, even for the small number of transitions where it occurred, but is worth noting. The range of transitions that were affected by this was greater on the likes of the Acer Z35, compared to the AOC. Be cautious of any response time measurements you see where grey levels of ‘0’ and ’50’ are considered, but nothing between, as this makes a big difference in practice to how widespread or obvious this ‘smearing’ is. In reality there are many transitions that occur in dark scenes in games between ‘0’ (black) and ’50’ (a dark grey), so to paint a full picture you have to consider them all. We appreciate it can be difficult to visualise the some of ‘weaknesses’ we’re describing here, so have provided a summary with visual examples in the video below.

Given the depth of analysis on BF1, we don’t have too much to add from our experiences on Dirt Rally. Again, the monitor made good use of the 100Hz refresh rate overall. At high frame rates matching this, the ‘connected feel’ was certainly good. Due to our fairly low skill level and use of a keyboard as the main controller on this game, though, this was not something we appreciated as much as on FPS titles like BF1. For hardcore racing fans, the low latency and high refresh rate combination offered by the AOC can certainly provide a much more enjoyable and competitive experience than at 60Hz. When racing in the daytime there were no obvious weaknesses in pixel responses, save for a little overshoot in places such as where trees were cast against a bright daytime sky. This was not eye-catching and was something we had to actively look out for. Even when racing at night, where the weakest pixel transitions come into play, things were relatively clean without distracting smearing or obvious inky break-up trailing. This was a far nicer racing experience than provided by most VA models, including the likes of the Acer Z35 which are built for speed but fail to really make proper use of the refresh rates supported. There was some overshoot here and there, including a bit of bright trailing and some dark trailing that was distinct from the background and object colour – but nothing we found distracting or even eye-catching when we were just playing the game rather than looking for issues.

Overall, we feel that the imperfections in this monitors responsiveness were too slight to really impede our enjoyment when gaming. Sensitivity to this does vary, as we’ve mentioned previously, but this is certainly one of the stronger VA models we’ve seen in terms of pixel responsiveness. We didn’t find things quite as well balanced as on the ASUS MX34VQ, but the experience was not far off that really and fortunately far superior to the older high refresh rate VA models we’ve tested. We also analysed responsiveness on our Blu-ray test titles. The monitor’s surprisingly good fluidity and generally good pixel responsiveness didn’t really come into play here. After all, you don’t interact with the content and it’s limited to around 24fps. Nonetheless, there were no obvious weaknesses caused by the monitor itself.

G-SYNC – the technology and activating it

Nvidia G-SYNC is a variable refresh rate technology that can be activated when certain compatible Nvidia GPUs are connected to compatible monitors (such as the AOC AG352UCG). We look at the technology and the benefits it brings in this article, so don’t intend to repeat too much of what is already said there. At a basic level, G-SYNC allows the monitor to adjust its refresh rate based on the frame rate outputted by the GPU. This perfect synchronisation between refresh rate and frame rate gets rid of the stuttering (VSync on) or tearing (VSync off) that would come where the refresh rate and frame rate are misaligned. You also get a reduction in latency compared to running with VSync on in this variable frame rate environment, although as mentioned earlier we don’t have the means to accurately measure this.

This monitor supports G-SYNC via DP 1.2a (DisplayPort) when connected to a compatible Nvidia GPU. Having done so, everything should be configured automatically with G-SYNC ready to go. If that isn’t the case or you want to double check, open Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Set Up G-SYNC’. Ensure that the checkbox for ‘Enable G-SYNC’ is checked, then select your preferred operating mode. As the image below shows, this technology works in both ‘Full Screen’ and ‘Window’ modes, provided the correct option is selected for this. If the G-SYNC options seem to be missing from Nvidia Control Panel, this may be remedied by reconnecting the GPU or possibly connecting it to a different DP output if you can. If the options are still missing, reinstalling the GPU driver or updating this would be recommended.

The next step is to navigate to ‘Manage 3D settings’. Here there are a few settings of interest, the first of which is ‘Monitor Technology’. This should be set to ‘G-SYNC’ as shown below. Assuming this is all set up correctly, you should also see ‘G-SYNC’ written beside the resolution and refresh rate at the bottom of the OSD.

The second setting of interest is VSync, which can be set to one of the following; ‘On’, ‘Use the 3D application setting’, ‘Off’ or ‘Fast’ (GPU dependent). If you select ‘On’, then VSync kicks in if the frame rate exceeds the maximum refresh rate supported by the monitor (i.e. the G-SYNC ceiling of 100Hz / 100fps). If you select ‘Off’ then the frame rate will climb as high as it can whilst the monitor will only go as high as 100Hz, causing tearing and juddering as the frame rate rises above 100fps. Nvidia used to recommend you select either ‘On’ or ‘Off’ rather than ‘Use the 3D application setting’ as some in-game VSync implementations could potentially interfere with the smooth operation of G-SYNC. In practice it’s likely to work just fine if enforced in-game instead, however.

The ‘Fast’ option will be available on some newer GPUs, such as the GTX 1070 used in our test system. This enables a technology called ‘Fast Sync’, which only applies above the refresh rate and frame rate ceiling (>100Hz / 100fps). Below this G-SYNC operates as normal, whereas above this a special version of VSync called ‘Fast Sync’ is activated. This is a GPU rather than monitor feature so isn’t something we will explain in detail, but it is designed to reduce tearing at frame rates well above the refresh rate of the monitor. If you’re interested in this technology, which may be the case if you play older or less graphically demanding games at very high frame rates, you should watch this section of a video by Tom Petersen..

If the frame rate drops below the lowest refresh rate supported by the monitor (i.e. the G-SYNC floor of 30Hz / 30fps) then the monitor will set its refresh rate to a multiple of the frame rate. This keeps stuttering or tearing from uneven frame and refresh rate divisions in check – and it works in this way regardless of the VSync setting used. As explored in the proceeding section, though, low frame rates remain low frame rates regardless of the technology. At such low frame rates the experience is far from fluid even if tearing and stuttering are absent. Also note that G-SYNC can’t eliminate stuttering caused by other issues in the system or game environment such as insufficient RAM or network latency.

G-SYNC – the experience

We played a broad range of game titles on this monitor and found G-SYNC to work just as we’d hoped in all of them. Rather than repeating our experiences over a range of game titles, which would be both tedious and pointless, we will instead focus on a single game title. In this case Battlefield 1 (BF1), as G-SYNC certainly enhances the playability there and there are appropriate graphics options available to test the full range of frame rates and refresh rates supported. Using settings we were happy to use (fairly modest ones), the frame rate was generally high but not always laser-locked to 100fps. It was common for the frame rate to dip a bit, spending much of its time fluctuating between about 75fps and 100fps. Without G-SYNC active and simply keeping the monitor at a static 100Hz, obvious (to us) tearing and juddering would ensure with VSync disabled. Enabling VSync got rid of this tearing and associated juddering, but in its place was obvious stuttering. With G-SYNC active there were no such nuisances and the game simply ‘flowed’ in a smooth manner, making it more enjoyable to play.

There was still benefit to be had from frame rates of the upper end of that scale, though, close to or matching 100fps. The level of perceived blur increased and the ‘connected feel’ decreased somewhat as the frame rate fell lower. If we increased the graphics settings it was possible to see further dips – to as low as about 50fps using the ‘Ultra’ preset. The perceived blur and ‘connected feel’ was further affected by these drops in frame rate, but we certainly found the playability greatly enhanced with G-SYNC active owing to a lack of tearing, stuttering and juddering from mismatches between frame and refresh rate. If the ‘Resolution Scale’ slider was increased, which improves the game’s render resolution, then the frame rate dipped further. Increasing this sufficiently actually brought the frame rate below the 30fps minimum supported by G-SYNC on the hardware side. As explained earlier, though, the monitor sticks to multiples of the frame rate with its refresh rate. This worked correctly to avoid the tearing and stuttering that you’d otherwise expect, but the experience was frankly abhorrent at such low frame rates anyway.

One thing that must be stressed is that sensitivity to tearing and stuttering varies, so not everybody will find G-SYNC as much of a game changer as others. In general, we find gamers do appreciate the technology – and once they disable it or go back to a monitor without it, they find it quite painful. Whilst it’s the case of ‘the higher the better’ in terms of frame rate and gaining the most fluid gaming experience the monitor can offer, the flexibility that G-SYNC provides is certainly welcome. If you’re sensitive to tearing or stuttering then you might choose to lower your in-game settings sufficiently so that you gain a consistently high frame rate matching the refresh rate of the monitor. With G-SYNC, the slight dips below this are far more palatable and so you can be a little more adventurous with your settings. For users who are sensitive to both tearing and stuttering, such as ourselves, it is quite literally a game-changing technology.

The 35” 3440 x 1440 curved ‘UltraWide’ experience

In this article we explore the 3440 x 1440 resolution on a 34” screen, including a look at what it brings to the table on the desktop, in movies and in games. The benefits of this aspect ratio and resolution apply equally to the AG352UCG, but an additional aspect to consider is the 2000R curve. There’s also an extra inch of diagonal screen space, but that makes a negligible difference really. Although the curve can look more pronounced in videos and images and the thought of a curved screen doesn’t sit well with all users, those preconceptions are generally blown out of the water once you actually sit down and use one. The curve on the AOC does not make the experience uncomfortable (quite the opposite) or unnatural and in little time at all feels completely natural. We appreciate that users who require geometric perfection on their screen (CAD/CAM work etc.) would prefer a flat screen, but for general usage we feel the curve is quite a nice addition. We don’t find flat screens of this size uncomfortable, so we can’t really verify the manufacturers claims of enhanced viewing comfort, but we certainly did find it comfortable to use for extended periods. The images below exaggerate the curve and it’s certainly not as noticeable in practice, but they are more intended to give an indication of the sort of desktop space you have available on the monitor.

As explained in our article on the topic, the 21:9 aspect ratio provides a nice boost to the Field of View in most modern game titles. Coupled with the curve screen, there was a subtle sense of being ‘drawn into’ the game – a certain extra level of depth that most monitors don’t provide. It was almost a subconscious addition, the curve, as you soon forget it’s even there. It just feels quite natural and as if it was something monitors always had, which we don’t feel is a bad thing. The images below again make the curve appear more prominent than it does when you’re sitting in front of the monitor using it. They also give no indication of the image quality to expect from the monitor – photos and videos are inherently unable to do this. They are just there for illustrative purposes.

Interpolation and upscaling

As is usual for a G-SYNC monitor, no scaling capability is provided by the monitor itself when connected via DP. The G-SYNC board replaces this, amongst other electronics in the monitor. Basic scaling functionality is provided for compatibility purposes via HDMI. The monitor is able to run at lower resolutions that may be used by games consoles and other AV devices – such as 1920 x 1080 (‘1080p’). The monitor uses ratio scaling to ensure that the image does not appear stretched or distorted. It is displayed in the correct 16:9 aspect ratio in a 27” diagonal area of the screen, with black borders either side. Interpolation is used for the vertical element to translate ‘1080’ into ‘1440’ so that the vertical screen space is used completely. This gives a degree of softening compared to a monitor that runs 1920 x 1080 natively. But it isn’t extreme and we feel this does make the monitor it least useable for this sort of thing as a secondary use, even if not ideal.

PC users who are playing older titles or those that simply don’t support 21:9 (the same titles that would lack support for Nvidia Surround or Eyefinity) will probably find the best experience is gained by running at 2560 x 1440 and using GPU scaling to ensure 1:1 pixel mapping is used. Unlike for 1920 x 1080, this does not require interpolation – black bars are displayed either side and the vertical component of the monitor (‘1440’) remains the same. Things therefore look just as sharp as a native 2560 x 1440 display, although be aware that GPU scaling can add additional latency. Discussion or testing of this is beyond the scope of this review, though, as it is down to the GPU rather than the monitor.

Conclusion

We’ve experienced quite a few VA models with higher than 60Hz refresh rates now and in general they haven’t really had adequate pixel responsiveness to make a proper go of the refresh rates they support. The ASUS MX34VQ bucked that trend by making a really good go of its 100Hz refresh rate. The AOC AGON AG352UCG features a slightly different panel, an AU Optronics 35” model rather than a Samsung 34” model. But it benefits from G-SYNC (rather than offering support for AMD FreeSync) and the same panel type (VA) with a similar curvature and resolution. We found the overall package to be rather appealing, with the physical width of the screen and the curvature providing an engrossing but natural-feeling experience both on the desktop and when gaming. The ergonomic flexibility (height adjustment in particular) will also be quite welcome on this model, something which the ASUS was notably lacking.

Out of the box the monitor delivered an undeniably bright image, but one that was lacking a bit of depth and ‘punch’. This was easily rectified in the OSD, particularly once the gamma mode was changed and brightness was lowered to more comfortable levels. The static contrast was generally slightly above the 2000:1 specified and although it did not reach the levels of some VA models, did deliver a distinctive ‘VA look’ to the image. Overall depth was pleasing, whilst bright elements stood out nicely against darker surroundings. The screen surface was also smooth and light, meaning that there wasn’t obvious graininess to contend with either. The colour performance was strong overall, with a good range of vivid-looking shades and a generous but not excessive colour gamut that helped deliver the sort of experience a gaming monitor should deliver. As is typical for a VA panel, there was a degree of saturation lost towards the side edges and bottom of the screen. Although performance was weaker in that respect than on models such as the ASUS MX34VQ, it was by no means extreme for a VA model of this size.

Whilst we can’t say it provided a flawless performance in terms of responsiveness, it certainly impressed in many respects. Pixel responses were generally snappy enough to make a good go of the 100Hz refresh rate, which when coupled with the low latency of the monitor aided a very nice ‘connected feel’. There was a bit of extra perceived blur in places over 100Hz models with much stronger pixel responsiveness, but this was far removed from the mess of extensive smeary trailing that VA models are renowned for. Even those that boast high refresh rates, such as the Acer Z35. The monitor did use strong grey to grey acceleration to achieve this, with the side effect being a bit of overshoot. This was a bit more visible than on the ASUS with both running at 100Hz and using their optimal response time setting, but nothing we felt was particularly eye-catching or obtrusive. G-SYNC worked in exactly the way we had come to expect from extensive testing of the technology on other models, too, removing the tearing and stuttering associated with traditional frame and refresh rate mismatches. One notable absence on this model is ULMB, a strobe backlight feature that greatly reduces perceived blur at frame rates matching the refresh rate of the monitor. On this model that would have meant flickering at 100Hz (or 85Hz) which some users would find unpleasant, and perhaps AOC or Nvidia didn’t feel that the model was well-suited to the technology for other reasons as well.

Overall, we found this a worthy companion to our Nvidia GTX 1070 and one with the flexibility to stretch considerably more powerful GPUs as well. The marriage of UltraWide screen, 3440 x 1440 resolution, 100Hz refresh rate and G-SYNC is one which looks nice on paper and in this case worked nicely in practice as well. It’s also difficult to ignore the (at this time projected) retail price of this model, too, which whilst not cheap is certainly more affordable than the competing UltraWide G-SYNC models using overclocked 60Hz IPS panels. Whether the relatively high-contrast VA panel free from ‘IPS glow’ makes for a better experience than the more consistent colours and tighter pixel responsiveness of the IPS alternatives is a matter for debate. But in our view there is a lot to like about the AOC and it certainly warrants careful consideration for Nvidia gamers.

The bottom line; a model with a pleasing mixture of strong contrast, fairly vivid colour reproduction, decent responsiveness and the all-important (to some) addition of G-SYNC.

PositivesNegatives
Quite a vivid and varied image following appropriate OSD tweaking, with a light matte screen surface and generous colour gamut complementing the VA panel nicelyGamma tracks at ‘2.1’ on average using the optimal gamma mode, but this is likely intentional and designed to alleviate ‘black crush’
Strong static contrast delivering some good deep shades and good distinctive bright shades, with the screen surface free from obvious graininessA little ‘black crush’, although quite minor really, and some saturation lost at the edges and bottom of screen. This usual for a VA panel, but a bit more pronounced than on 100Hz+ UltraWides using Samsung SVA models
G-SYNC, low input lag and a 100Hz refresh rate was coupled with decent pixel responsiveness to provide a convincing gaming experienceSome weaknesses in pixel responsiveness in places and a bit of overshoot as well, plus no support for ULMB
Good ergonomic flexibility, a nice pixel density and practical resolution and a curve to the screen that complements the performance without making the image appear unnaturalThe design won’t be to everyone’s taste, although that could be said about any monitor – and in many respects, it’s fairly subdued for a ‘gaming monitor’ without bright painted stripes etc.

Like our reviews? Please help support the website by purchasing your monitor or other computer peripherals and components using the link below. You should be automatically redirected to your nearest Amazon after clicking. If that’s not the case please visit this post to find a link for your preferred country. We greatly appreciate your support.

Donations are also greatly appreciated.

pcmonitors.info

Обзор игрового монитора AOC Agon AG352UCG - Дико полезные советы по выбору электроники

Во многих отношениях лучшие игровые ПК не хуже, чем монитор, подключенный к ним.

Это вряд ли произойдет с AOC Agon AG352UCG, многофункциональным игровым монитором, который обещает дать вам захватывающий и шелковисто-гладкий игровой процесс.

Недавний участник в линейке мониторов Agon, ориентированных на игры AOC, AG352UCG — мощный 35-дюймовый монитор с ультрашироким соотношением 21: 9.

Ценообразование и доступность

Вы не должны быть слишком удивлены, узнав, что такой большой и функциональный игровой монитор поставляется с высокой ценой.

Его цена составляет £ 799 ($ ​​899), а австралийская цена и доступность еще не подтверждены.

Более ориентированный на бизнес Philips Brilliance BDM3490UC поставляется ниже на £ 670 (около $ 960, AU $ 1,350), но вы жертвуете размером (это 27-дюймовые, а не 35-дюймовые), а также некоторые из функций, ориентированных на игры,

Если вы планируете покупать какой-либо ультраширокий монитор, вы заплатите немало денег, а игровой монитор AOC Agon AG352UCG расположится вокруг верхнего среднего диапазона того, что вы ожидаете платить.

дизайн

Сверхширокий 35-дюймовый монитор неизбежно станет большим зверьком, который будет доминировать на любом столе, на котором он будет размещен — это монитор, который займет много места, с размерами 847 x 587 x 266,45 мм.

С прикрепленным подставкой (вам нужно ввернуть его самостоятельно), вы можете наклонять, поворачивать и регулировать высоту, чтобы сделать экран удобным для использования.

Как и следовало ожидать от игрового монитора, дизайн, безусловно, поражает, и хотя он не так агрессивен, как дизайн Acer Predator X34, он помогает монитору выделяться (как будто этому огромному монитору нужна была какая-то помощь с

Внизу также есть две длинные светодиодные полосы, которые могут отображать зеленый, красный или синий в зависимости от ваших предпочтений.

Светодиоды также приближаются к задней части монитора, который имеет пластиковый черный и серебряный дизайн.

Вокруг задней части монитора находятся порт HDMI, DisplayPort и четыре порта USB 3.0, а также аудиовыход.

Особенности

Мы упоминали, насколько величен игровой монитор AOC Agon AG352UCG.

Если вы опасаетесь, что короткое и широкое соотношение сторон AOC Agon AG352UCG приведет к стесненному рабочему пространству, не бойтесь, потому что разрешение 3440 x 1440 достаточно велико, чтобы оставить вам много настольной недвижимости.

И это прежде, чем мы упоминали, что этот монитор совместим с G-Sync.

  • Nvidia G-Sync против AMD FreeSync

G-Sync

Поддерживая G-Sync, AOC Agon AG352UCG присоединяется к Asus MG248Q, Asus ROG Swift PG248Q и AOC Agon AG271QG.

Объедините это с большим размером, высоким разрешением и ультра-широким соотношением сторон, а AOC Agon AG352UCG отметит многие из коробок, необходимых для грозного игрового монитора.

Стоит отметить, однако, что максимальная частота обновления AOC Agon AG352UCG составляет 100 Гц — так не так высока, как позволяет G-Sync, хотя это тот же самый, что и ее ближайший соперник, Acer Predator X34.

Другие функции включают встроенные стереодинамики, коэффициент контрастности 2000: 1, поддержку цветовой гаммы sRGB 100% и время отклика 4 мс.

Экранные меню мониторов, как правило, довольно неудобно для навигации, но это работает очень хорошо, и вы можете легко переключаться между различными вариантами.

Представление

AOC Agon AG352UCG, безусловно, полнофункциональный на бумаге, поэтому мы были рады проверить его.

Затем мы дали монитору вращение с превосходным Battlefield 1. Это захватывающая многопользовательская игра, которая действительно выигрывает от хорошего монитора, и AOC Agon AG352UCG поставляет в пики.

Battlefield 1, как и многие современные игры, правильно определил необычное соотношение сторон и настроил интерфейс и графику игры соответственно.

Это небольшая цена за такой впечатляющий игровой опыт, и благодаря функциям G-Sync наряду с широким соотношением сторон этот монитор действительно может дать вам конкурентное преимущество при игре в игры.

AOC Agon AG352UCG также имеет фантастические углы обзора, поэтому, если вы используете его для просмотра фильмов с друзьями или вокруг людей вокруг вас, когда вы играете, тогда почти все получат отличный обзор.

Там также низкий уровень синего света, который призван помочь вам работать ночью, не напрягая глаз или не влияя на вашу способность спать.

Возвращаясь к Battlefield 1, это отличная игра, чтобы продемонстрировать цветную обработку AOC Agon AG352UCG.

В наших играх не было заметной задержки ввода, а G-Sync от AOC Agon AG352UCG работает с графическим процессором GTX 1080, чтобы предложить невероятно захватывающий и отзывчивый опыт.

Высокое разрешение и ультраширокий дизайн также отлично работали в Windows 10 с дополнительным пространством экрана, благодаря чему у вас было достаточно места для одновременного открытия нескольких окон и программ, что сделало бы это отличным монитором для производительности, а также для игр.

Окончательный вердикт

Если у вас есть рабочее место, мощная графическая карта и необходимый банковский баланс, AOC Agon AG352UCG — отличная инвестиция для геймеров.

Это также неплохой монитор, когда вы не играете, с высоким разрешением 3440 x 1440, что дает вам много места, когда вы используете свой компьютер для работы.

Тем не менее, именно в играх, которые AOC Agon AG352UCG действительно сияет, с отличной цветопередачей, быстрым временем отклика и плавными скоростями кадров, предоставляемыми G-Sync.

Конечно, для использования G-Sync вам нужна совместимая графическая карта Nvidia;

ru.ditching.eu


Смотрите также