Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 913 conversations about:
Turquoiseland
28
Oct 24, 2017
bookmark_border
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
TurquoiselandOne thing I want to point out is that the color accuracy, luminance, and contrast numbers Linus shows are not good, despite saying they are good. Here are numbers from another site for similar monitors https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7572/5/acer-predator-z35p-vs-aoc-agon-ag352ucg-review-titanic-g-sync-battle-brightnessnand-contrast . To summarize the information from Linus's charts and the comparison
* Second worse luminance (if this was at max luminance) * Third worse black levels at that brightness (arguably the worse due to how much lower the luminance is) * Third worse contrast * Third worse color deviation * Fourth best/worse (middle of the pack) greyscale * Third worse color temperature (pretty close though to competitors) * Second worse gamma (2.2 is the target for screens with sRGB 1.8 for print iirc), but little deviation it appears
The other thing this review unfortunately doesn't touch on at all is the actual response time, input lag, and ghosting.
EDIT: To clarify, if you took Linus's numbers and stuck it into the above chart, so you could compare all 7 monitors side-by-side the Vast would in general be in the bottom half of the pack out of 7 monitors.
* Second worse luminance (if this was at max luminance) * Third worse black levels at that brightness (arguably the worse due to how much lower the luminance is) * Third worse contrast * Third worse color deviation * Fourth best/worse (middle of the pack) greyscale * Third worse color temperature (pretty close though to competitors) * Second worse gamma (2.2 is the target for screens with sRGB 1.8 for print iirc), but little deviation it appears
The other thing this review unfortunately doesn't touch on at all is the actual response time, input lag, and ghosting.
EDIT: To clarify, if you took Linus's numbers and stuck it into the above chart, so you could compare all 7 monitors side-by-side the Vast would in general be in the bottom half of the pack out of 7 monitors.
Wittenzellner
41
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
Akkumawhat does those numbers have to do with the massdrop monitor?
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
WittenzellnerYou compare the numbers presented in Linus's video and compare it to the numbers in the charts to compare it to similar monitors. Basically if you added Linus's numbers for this monitor into those charts that is where it would place.
jloopy212
221
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
WittenzellnerHe's just cherry picking random comps to make the monitor look bad; you can look through the other comments he's made on this drop and judge their veracity for yourself.
Check out the punchline of that article: "If you are looking for a UWQHD gaming, you cannot ignore the Acer Predator Z35P and the AOC Agon AG352UCG. Both offer remarkably good colour quality, very fast response times and an elegant and ergonomic design. With G-sync, something both monitors offer, they also play into the favorite graphics cards of gamers at the moment."
The panel in the Vast is exactly the same as the one in the AOC, which is about $900 shipped right now and was reviewed at $1,100. As above, that monitor is the #1 recommendation for price/quality ratio at retail.
You're getting the same panel here at a ~50% discount - an incredible value in terms of quality by any measure.
Check out the punchline of that article: "If you are looking for a UWQHD gaming, you cannot ignore the Acer Predator Z35P and the AOC Agon AG352UCG. Both offer remarkably good colour quality, very fast response times and an elegant and ergonomic design. With G-sync, something both monitors offer, they also play into the favorite graphics cards of gamers at the moment."
The panel in the Vast is exactly the same as the one in the AOC, which is about $900 shipped right now and was reviewed at $1,100. As above, that monitor is the #1 recommendation for price/quality ratio at retail.
You're getting the same panel here at a ~50% discount - an incredible value in terms of quality by any measure.
Darkzed1
66
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
TurquoiselandThis review felt very rushed to me and less polished/less thought out than his other reviews of monitors.
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
Wittenzellnerjloopy212 lives in a made up dream world where we now have numbers that show the Vast being beat by similar monitors in almost every metric other than price and refuses to acknowledge the Vast has any deficiencies because it is simply cheaper. He has yet to provide a single resource other than his opinion, which is less than fact.
It must be hard for him to read a chart with 6 different monitors on it that all provide similar monitors at various price points like https://www.amazon.com/Philips-Computer-Monitors-349X7FJEW-Monitor/dp/B06Y4TQSK1 for $700 or https://www.amazon.com/Designo-MX34VQ-Adaptive-Sync-Wireless-Frameless/dp/B01N4UQIGT for $750 well below the $900 of an AOC that he instantly points to and all providing better picture quality compared to the numbers provided by Linus's review. He also fails to mention the review gave the recommendation to the AOC as the better/best G-Sync monitor, not as the best of the bunch as it was specifically trying to see which of the two G-Sync monitors were better. The other monitors are there to show how those 2 G-Sync models compare to similar monitors regardless of G-Sync.
You basically have the choice between, AUO panel vs Samsung panel in those monitors, and the Vast comes at a ~20%-50% discount compared to the aforementioned monitors depending on features you want with generally worse display performance across the board. Now if the supposed ghosting elimination, better response time (neither of which have been validated in any review), mostly better stand, but worse picture quality is worth that discount then buy the Vast. However, you'll be waiting until January without the ability to potentially leverage black friday/cyber monday discounts (for US) on any monitor.
EDIT: You could even throw in the https://www.massdrop.com/buy/viotek-34-1440p-curved-100hz-gaming-monitor into the mix, which is pretty similar to the Vast.
It must be hard for him to read a chart with 6 different monitors on it that all provide similar monitors at various price points like https://www.amazon.com/Philips-Computer-Monitors-349X7FJEW-Monitor/dp/B06Y4TQSK1 for $700 or https://www.amazon.com/Designo-MX34VQ-Adaptive-Sync-Wireless-Frameless/dp/B01N4UQIGT for $750 well below the $900 of an AOC that he instantly points to and all providing better picture quality compared to the numbers provided by Linus's review. He also fails to mention the review gave the recommendation to the AOC as the better/best G-Sync monitor, not as the best of the bunch as it was specifically trying to see which of the two G-Sync monitors were better. The other monitors are there to show how those 2 G-Sync models compare to similar monitors regardless of G-Sync.
You basically have the choice between, AUO panel vs Samsung panel in those monitors, and the Vast comes at a ~20%-50% discount compared to the aforementioned monitors depending on features you want with generally worse display performance across the board. Now if the supposed ghosting elimination, better response time (neither of which have been validated in any review), mostly better stand, but worse picture quality is worth that discount then buy the Vast. However, you'll be waiting until January without the ability to potentially leverage black friday/cyber monday discounts (for US) on any monitor.
EDIT: You could even throw in the https://www.massdrop.com/buy/viotek-34-1440p-curved-100hz-gaming-monitor into the mix, which is pretty similar to the Vast.
jloopy212
221
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
AkkumaI read the whole article you linked and have provided a lot of facts based on that article. Here is the link to the conclusion for your reference, which summarizes the overall results well:
https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7572/13/acer-predator-z35p-vs-aoc-agon-ag352ucg-review-titanic-g-sync-battle-conclusion
You've alleged that the brightness, black levels, and colors are problematic. Let's see what the article says about this (relative to their "Ultimate" pick): "the AOC model offers better colour quality, slightly better uniformity, a clearly lower minimum brightness (this is important when gaming in the dark) and slightly better contrast."
So, in all the ways you allege it's weak - it's actually specifically superior to the best-in-class option.
The article awarded the AOC Agon AG352UCG "Excellent Choice Award" based on its superior value proposition at ~$1,100. The Vast uses the exact same panel and is on offer at a 50% discount.
So, you've made a number of claims that were directly countered by the article you cited. You're certainly entitled to whatever opinion you'd like to have about the matter. It's obvious you want to believe this is a poor monitor and you're comfortable with coming up with that conclusion whatever it takes.
https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7572/13/acer-predator-z35p-vs-aoc-agon-ag352ucg-review-titanic-g-sync-battle-conclusion
You've alleged that the brightness, black levels, and colors are problematic. Let's see what the article says about this (relative to their "Ultimate" pick): "the AOC model offers better colour quality, slightly better uniformity, a clearly lower minimum brightness (this is important when gaming in the dark) and slightly better contrast."
So, in all the ways you allege it's weak - it's actually specifically superior to the best-in-class option.
The article awarded the AOC Agon AG352UCG "Excellent Choice Award" based on its superior value proposition at ~$1,100. The Vast uses the exact same panel and is on offer at a 50% discount.
So, you've made a number of claims that were directly countered by the article you cited. You're certainly entitled to whatever opinion you'd like to have about the matter. It's obvious you want to believe this is a poor monitor and you're comfortable with coming up with that conclusion whatever it takes.
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
jloopy212The article is comparing the 2 G-Sync monitors and draws a conclusion between the 2 G-Sync monitors with 4 other monitors for reference. It does not draw a conclusion between all 6 monitors. The article concludes that the best of the 2 G-Sync monitors is the AOC.
> So, in all the ways you allege it's weak - it's actually specifically superior to the best-in-class option.
What are you looking at, every metric I compared to the AOC beats it other than in gamma. In fact, 3 other monitors all routinely beat it across those charts.
>The Vast uses the exact same panel and is on offer at a 50% discount.
Exact same panel manufacturer without anywhere near the same great measurements and without G-Sync.
So, you've made a number of claims that were directly countered by the article I cited. You're certainly entitled to whatever opinion you'd like to have about the matter. It's obvious you want to believe this is a good monitor and you're comfortable with coming up with that conclusion whatever it takes.
> So, in all the ways you allege it's weak - it's actually specifically superior to the best-in-class option.
What are you looking at, every metric I compared to the AOC beats it other than in gamma. In fact, 3 other monitors all routinely beat it across those charts.
>The Vast uses the exact same panel and is on offer at a 50% discount.
Exact same panel manufacturer without anywhere near the same great measurements and without G-Sync.
So, you've made a number of claims that were directly countered by the article I cited. You're certainly entitled to whatever opinion you'd like to have about the matter. It's obvious you want to believe this is a good monitor and you're comfortable with coming up with that conclusion whatever it takes.
jloopy212
221
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
AkkumaYou can look at it however you want. If your monitor is located outside in direct sun then the lack of brightness is definitely something to think about.
The bottom line here is that the article you linked awarded the AOC with the "Excellent Choice" award. I'm not a rocket surgeon, but I think it's reasonable to infer that the authors of said article think that the monitor is an excellent choice based on the analysis presented therein.
The AOC uses the same panel, not just the same manufacturer, as the Vast. It's literally the exact same product.
So if the AOC is a "Excellent Choice" at $1,100 then the Vast is out of this world at a 50% discount at least if we're talking value/quality.
Look, I was joking around because you got all triggered there, but maybe all these well-known monitor reviewers (Linus, Hardware Canucks, Hardware.info, Toms Hardware, etc.) that are saying great things about the Vast are totally wrong and you, random guy on the internet, are right. Who knows?
The bottom line here is that the article you linked awarded the AOC with the "Excellent Choice" award. I'm not a rocket surgeon, but I think it's reasonable to infer that the authors of said article think that the monitor is an excellent choice based on the analysis presented therein.
The AOC uses the same panel, not just the same manufacturer, as the Vast. It's literally the exact same product.
So if the AOC is a "Excellent Choice" at $1,100 then the Vast is out of this world at a 50% discount at least if we're talking value/quality.
Look, I was joking around because you got all triggered there, but maybe all these well-known monitor reviewers (Linus, Hardware Canucks, Hardware.info, Toms Hardware, etc.) that are saying great things about the Vast are totally wrong and you, random guy on the internet, are right. Who knows?
Wittenzellner
41
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
Akkumalmfao dont drag me into this. i just said thanks for explaining your comment. i can make my own decisions.
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
jloopy212>You can look at it however you want. If your monitor is located outside in direct sun then the lack of brightness is definitely something to think about.
That's a cop out to the fact that every other meaningful number shows it still worse like black levels, contrast, color accuracy, greyscale, color temperature.
>The bottom line here is that the article you linked awarded the AOC with the "Excellent Choice" award. I'm not a rocket surgeon, but I think it's reasonable to infer that the authors of said article think that the monitor is an excellent choice based on the analysis presented therein.
And? The article uses 6 monitors with 4 of those to provide a reference to the main 2 G-Sync monitors getting compared. Did I say the AOC is a bad monitor, no. I pointed out you outright lied that the AOC is outperformed by the Vast based on those numbers and 3 other monitors used as reference outperform it.
> The AOC uses the same panel, not just the same manufacturer, as the Vast. It's literally the exact same product.
It is the same panel insofar that the model is the same, but the numbers aren't even remotely the same between the two. AOC seems to have opted for a higher quality version of the same panel that lets it do really well, while Massdrop opted for the lower quality version putting it in the bottom.
> So if the AOC is a "Excellent Choice" at $1,100 then the Vast is out of this world at a 50% discount at least if we're talking value/quality.
The AOC is a G-Sync monitor and seeing as how the review is a review between two G-Sync monitors their conclusion is based on paying G-Sync monitor prices and the better of those two. If we exclude that monitor and compare the other 3 monitors that best the Vast is only a 20%-30% discount for a worse performing monitor. There's nothing wrong with saying one can't afford or refuses to pay 20-30% more and that picture quality is one of your lowest priorities when buying a monitor
> Look, I was joking around because you got all triggered there, but maybe all these well-known monitor reviewers (Linus, Hardware Canucks, Hardware.info, Toms Hardware, etc.) that are saying great things about the Vast are totally wrong and you, random guy on the internet, are right. Who knows?
Where did Hardware.info review this monitor???? Linus had average things to say and pointed out Massdrop exaggerated/lied about certain information. Hardware Canucks can't even be bothered to do a real analysis of the display quality and provide purely a subjective review and had some form of glitch which they can't attribute to the monitor. Their review is akin to popping in a new cpu and saying it feels faster without a single benchmark. Even still just like Linus they pointed out the plastic, which wasn't a positive aspect of their reviews.
Aside from Linus, Tom's Hardware is literally the only one who provided a review with display performance numbers and in it their greyscale and color accuracy out of box were even worse than Linus's review sample. However, their contrast ratio seems significantly different than Linus despite similar luminance. The panel lottery is going to more than likely happen here if these two samples, Linus & Tom's Hardware, are any indication of just how much they can fluctuate.
That's a cop out to the fact that every other meaningful number shows it still worse like black levels, contrast, color accuracy, greyscale, color temperature.
>The bottom line here is that the article you linked awarded the AOC with the "Excellent Choice" award. I'm not a rocket surgeon, but I think it's reasonable to infer that the authors of said article think that the monitor is an excellent choice based on the analysis presented therein.
And? The article uses 6 monitors with 4 of those to provide a reference to the main 2 G-Sync monitors getting compared. Did I say the AOC is a bad monitor, no. I pointed out you outright lied that the AOC is outperformed by the Vast based on those numbers and 3 other monitors used as reference outperform it.
> The AOC uses the same panel, not just the same manufacturer, as the Vast. It's literally the exact same product.
It is the same panel insofar that the model is the same, but the numbers aren't even remotely the same between the two. AOC seems to have opted for a higher quality version of the same panel that lets it do really well, while Massdrop opted for the lower quality version putting it in the bottom.
> So if the AOC is a "Excellent Choice" at $1,100 then the Vast is out of this world at a 50% discount at least if we're talking value/quality.
The AOC is a G-Sync monitor and seeing as how the review is a review between two G-Sync monitors their conclusion is based on paying G-Sync monitor prices and the better of those two. If we exclude that monitor and compare the other 3 monitors that best the Vast is only a 20%-30% discount for a worse performing monitor. There's nothing wrong with saying one can't afford or refuses to pay 20-30% more and that picture quality is one of your lowest priorities when buying a monitor
> Look, I was joking around because you got all triggered there, but maybe all these well-known monitor reviewers (Linus, Hardware Canucks, Hardware.info, Toms Hardware, etc.) that are saying great things about the Vast are totally wrong and you, random guy on the internet, are right. Who knows?
Where did Hardware.info review this monitor???? Linus had average things to say and pointed out Massdrop exaggerated/lied about certain information. Hardware Canucks can't even be bothered to do a real analysis of the display quality and provide purely a subjective review and had some form of glitch which they can't attribute to the monitor. Their review is akin to popping in a new cpu and saying it feels faster without a single benchmark. Even still just like Linus they pointed out the plastic, which wasn't a positive aspect of their reviews.
Aside from Linus, Tom's Hardware is literally the only one who provided a review with display performance numbers and in it their greyscale and color accuracy out of box were even worse than Linus's review sample. However, their contrast ratio seems significantly different than Linus despite similar luminance. The panel lottery is going to more than likely happen here if these two samples, Linus & Tom's Hardware, are any indication of just how much they can fluctuate.
Wittenzellner
41
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
jloopy212nah im in the market for a $500 monitor with decent specs. i can do both professional work on & game on. compared to my 2 $100 AOC 60hz monitors... Im sure this is far better in any aspect. and im sure that this monitor is marketed towards exactly that. Not a shitty monitor most everyone has. Not top spec that everyone wishes a monitor could be without spending 2k on one. Its a good middle ground monitor that most ultrawides should drop price down to. I think its insane seeing $600 ultrawides with the same specs as a 1080p 60hz $100 monitor.
jloopy212
221
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
WittenzellnerIt is perfect for that, don't like this joker tell you otherwise.
My point was that he's claiming that a $750 monitor without GSync/Freesync is fundamentally better for gaming than a $550 monitor with adaptive sync because like the brightness is slightly less.
It's laughable - like claiming a Honda Civic is better for track racing than a 911 because it gets higher gas mileage.
My point was that he's claiming that a $750 monitor without GSync/Freesync is fundamentally better for gaming than a $550 monitor with adaptive sync because like the brightness is slightly less.
It's laughable - like claiming a Honda Civic is better for track racing than a 911 because it gets higher gas mileage.
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
jloopy212I see you're continuing the trend of lacking the capability of reading seeing as https://www.amazon.com/Designo-MX34VQ-Adaptive-Sync-Wireless-Frameless/dp/B01N4UQIGT is a $750 monitor WITH Freesync and was in the hardware.info charts. Not to mention not once did I say the monitor is better for gaming. I didn't even write the word gaming anywhere. Even HardwareCanucks & Linus both pretty much agree that with a monitor this large you need a nvidia card to properly run it unless you're ok with lowering the graphics quality to run at native resolution.
jloopy212
221
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
Akkuma" Not to mention not once did I say the monitor is better for gaming. I didn't even write the word gaming anywhere. "
Makes sense, why would anyone care about the gaming performance of the "Vast 35-inch Curved Gaming Monitor"? Clearly irrelevant to the discussion.
At any rate, the panel you linked is honestly not a bad option at a $200 markup over the Vast - first remotely intelligent point you've made in this thread. Very proud of you!
Makes sense, why would anyone care about the gaming performance of the "Vast 35-inch Curved Gaming Monitor"? Clearly irrelevant to the discussion.
At any rate, the panel you linked is honestly not a bad option at a $200 markup over the Vast - first remotely intelligent point you've made in this thread. Very proud of you!
Akkuma
37
Oct 25, 2017
bookmark_border
WittenzellnerIf you specifically didn't need or want a curved ultrawide I recommend saving the cash and getting a non-curved, non-ultrawide, or neither. Ultrawide adds a premium of sorts and although game support is better there are some games who refuse to support it or don't support it. Add in the curve and that adds even more premium without actually making a better monitor in specs or subjectively to many (plus some outright hate it). For instance, you can find faster hz monitors outside of the curved ultrawide category and larger resolutions, which can have a higher PPI.
The other thing to take into account is how powerful your GPU is to power this monitor for gaming purposes as. If you're unsure, I'd recommend pulling up some 1400p/2k or so benchmarks, https://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU17/1914 (this is slightly lower resolution), to get a rough idea if your GPU can handle it or if you'd need to lower the settings. For business purposes, if you're doing spreadsheets this will be awesome. If you're not doing anything that is wide you won't see much benefit. If you're doing color sensitive work this probably isn't the monitor without calibration. If you want a more immersive gaming experience get a curved ultrawide.
The other thing to take into account is how powerful your GPU is to power this monitor for gaming purposes as. If you're unsure, I'd recommend pulling up some 1400p/2k or so benchmarks, https://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU17/1914 (this is slightly lower resolution), to get a rough idea if your GPU can handle it or if you'd need to lower the settings. For business purposes, if you're doing spreadsheets this will be awesome. If you're not doing anything that is wide you won't see much benefit. If you're doing color sensitive work this probably isn't the monitor without calibration. If you want a more immersive gaming experience get a curved ultrawide.
Wittenzellner
41
Oct 26, 2017
bookmark_border
Akkumabro, im a professional at what i do. i know what i need/ want for my setup at home. i dont need you to tell me what i want/need, ive got 2 1080s i think im covered.
stupidusernamecheck
48
Jan 3, 2018
bookmark_border
Akkumai think you might have discovered this already but for games that dont run it on that res, you can always run it on 1:1 seting on this monitor and simply select the highest res that the game supports. (either thru ingame menu or thru the vid card resolution setup). true it willl not be widescreen but there are only few games that dont support that, so only a tiny section of ppl will miss out. i am not willing to forgo this monitor for those ppl :)
Related Products
.gif?auto=format&fm=gif&fit=crop&w=360&h=360&bg=f0f0f0&fill=solid&fill-color=f0f0f0&dpr=1&q=70)
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop
https://youtu.be/JPZCvL_Hooo