Massdrop Vast 35-Inch Curved Gaming Monitor Discussions | Drop

Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions

Free Standard Shipping in the US on orders over $99

Massdrop Vast 35-Inch Curved Gaming Monitor

More Community Picks

Battlestations

Showing 1 of 913 conversations about:

Massdrop Vast 35-Inch Curved Gaming Monitor

D367ruc70

Oct 26, 2017

Using FastSync probably won't do much good with a monitor like this if you have a GeForce card. You're most likely not always going to push more frames than the display (100hz but 3440x1440 is going to not be easy on higher end games). Unless you drop settings down to get a high framerate, dipping below the refresh rate you're still going to get a lot of screentearing even with fastsync. This being a Freesync monitor at this price despite the size/curve, gonna have to wait on a Gsync model. I'm not gonna upgrade from my 27 inch Acer Predator Gsync monitor. Even with my 1080ti, this seems still like a monitor for AMD users or someone just REALLY wanting a ultrawide with a decent refresh rate.

Vote

Akkuma

Oct 27, 2017

D367ruc70It isn't even really a monitor for AMD users as the res is getting to a point where you either sacrifice quality or dip low into the Freesync range in the opinions of HardwareCanucks & Linus.

Vote

Rakija

Oct 27, 2017

AkkumaYeah I do agree with Linus, FreeSync is more of a marketing point than a useful feature.

Vote

jloopy212

221

Oct 27, 2017

RakijaPlease don't feed the trolls.
It's a great monitor for AMD users and anyone that is interested in getting strong value.
And yeah, adaptive sync is a useful feature.

Rakija

Oct 27, 2017

jloopy212Not sure what you mean, but what I'm saying is that FreeSync sounds great when listing the features, while in reality it isn't that relevant when you take a good look at the situation. AMD cards are not as powerful as Nvidia's if you can even get one. And that's what Linus pointed out in his video.

Vote

jloopy212

221

Oct 27, 2017

Rakija"AMD cards are not as powerful as Nvidia's"
This point has been disproven so many times in this discussion and elsewhere that if you want to believe this then there's probably very little that can be said to convince you otherwise.
At any rate, if you don't think adaptive sync is a useful feature then there are a lot of other monitors out there that don't have adaptive sync. The general consensus is that it's one of the most important developments in gaming display technology in the last decade or so, but that doesn't mean it's for everyone.

Rakija

Oct 27, 2017

jloopy212Until Vega, AMD didn't have a high end card lineup for quite a while. And even Vega doesn't isn't a great competitor to the high end Nvidia cards. Not to mention the availability. I'm not saying adaptive sync isn't useful, I'm saying that FreeSync isn't very relevant because you need a powerful AMD setup to properly use it.

Vote

jloopy212

221

Oct 27, 2017

RakijaI agree on availability - if you need a new GPU today then you're going to have to pay for it. If you're the kind of person that only buys a new GPU every like 5 years and you're sitting on a new 1080Ti, then this monitor is probably a hard pass.
Most people aren't in that boat. Today, both AMD and NVidia now have compelling offerings across a range of price points as Vega availability has improved and prices have come down in the last few weeks.
Disagree on the usefulness of adaptive sync. Vega is more than a match for comparable NVidia cards - it runs modestly ahead on benchmarks in the latest games. Both Vega cards can comfortably push into the Vast Freesync range at max setting on current games. The last generation will be able to hit the lower end of the range as well - if you're sitting on an AMD 4XX or NVidia 7XX then yeah, you're probably going to need to dial some settings back at UWQHD.
At any rate, what you're really saying is that GPUs have not caught up to the UWQHD resolution yet since only flagship cards can drive 80+ FPS on modern games at that resolution. That's an interesting point, but it's not really have anything to do with this monitor and, in my opinion, totally misses the boat on the value of future proofing here.

Bronze-Knight

Oct 28, 2017

jloopy212I'm in the new GPU every 5 years and have a new 1080Ti and I7 6700k Camp. Thinking real hard about getting this.
I like all the featu this has, but the selling point is the price. What would be worth getting at this price point that's better than the Vast?

jloopy212

221

Oct 28, 2017

Bronze-KnightThere's nothing at this price point even close. You need a GSync monitor to go with the NVidia card. Comparable GSync monitor will cost you $900+. If you wait for Black Friday sales, you might be able to get something in the $700-$800 range.

Vote

Bronze-Knight

Oct 28, 2017

jloopy212I just don't think I need G-Sync. I mean it be nice to have, but I only have so much money.

Vote

jloopy212

221

Oct 28, 2017

Bronze-KnightI mean, you spent $700+ on a GPU. You knew what you were buying into with the NVidia monopoly. Silly to waste all that to save a couple hundred on a monitor. That's just the definition of penny wise, pound foolish.
Quite frankly, adaptive sync is the most important feature for gaming panels. Full stop. You should not even be considering panels without it or that are incompatible with your GPU.

Vote

Bronze-Knight

Oct 28, 2017

jloopy212No saying your wrong but I almost never notice any monitor sync issues with my current 1080p 65Hz monitor.
I just dont see how paying another $150 to $200 for a 27" G-Sync monitor with simular or better specs is going to be better than a curved 35".
Are re there any good overviews on g-sync? I'm failing to see why it's a "need" rather than a "nice extra".

Vote

David_R

110

Oct 28, 2017

Bronze-KnightThere is a YouTube video that I would link here if I could find it. The author goes over v-sync, freesync, and g-sync. His accent is German, in case you come across it or someone else knows it. The takeaway I have gotten is that input lag is lowest with g-sync, followed by freesync, and also that screen tearing mainly pertains to the 40-60fps range when it is fluctuating. So I’d guess that, because a 1080 is able to maintain 65hz, screen tearing is not a concern. As for whether it’s a nice extra or a necessity, I suspect it comes down to how much screen tearing bothers the player, and then whether the input lag of v-sync impacts play. I’ll turn off g-sync and see whether it makes a difference.

Vote

jloopy212

221

Oct 29, 2017

Bronze-KnightI mean of course there's no tearing on that screen. A GPU from 5 years ago could run at Max Hz on that PoS.
UW 1440 at 100Hz is a whole different game. Your 1080Ti will not cap out even current games, let alone the next generation.

Vote