I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible /sweat.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sweat:' /> )
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible /sweat.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sweat:' /> )
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
[quote name='Adz 3000' post='999424' date='Feb 11 2010, 10:43 AM']Thanks for the review Gekko!
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible /sweat.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sweat:' /> )
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?[/quote]
For me, and the more I've thought about this. I would pay $500-600 for the AW... I just feels and looks very professional. The Acer is in no way shape or form worth $400. I would not pay over $200 for it. It would be a "good" buy for $200 but asking 400 is ridiculous. Than again, im sure £1-150 is over $200 isnt it? I would pay the difference myself, because the Acer seems to only be "great" while playing 3d games and very very mediocre outside of that. While the AW is all around a superb monitor.
A note to everyone asking about pics. I had them set up side by side for pictures but my camera was dead... I am leaving directly from work for the weekend and I will try to get some pics on Sunday.
I have one picture on my phone I can email you if you guys want to message me your emails. But honestly, cameras make the brightness difference look worse than it is in real life. You can tell its brighter by a little bit, but I honestly would not pictures of brightness (as it is so much more than just looking "brighter") as a foundation for any claims.
[quote name='Adz 3000' post='999424' date='Feb 11 2010, 10:43 AM']Thanks for the review Gekko!
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible /sweat.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sweat:' /> )
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
For me, and the more I've thought about this. I would pay $500-600 for the AW... I just feels and looks very professional. The Acer is in no way shape or form worth $400. I would not pay over $200 for it. It would be a "good" buy for $200 but asking 400 is ridiculous. Than again, im sure £1-150 is over $200 isnt it? I would pay the difference myself, because the Acer seems to only be "great" while playing 3d games and very very mediocre outside of that. While the AW is all around a superb monitor.
A note to everyone asking about pics. I had them set up side by side for pictures but my camera was dead... I am leaving directly from work for the weekend and I will try to get some pics on Sunday.
I have one picture on my phone I can email you if you guys want to message me your emails. But honestly, cameras make the brightness difference look worse than it is in real life. You can tell its brighter by a little bit, but I honestly would not pictures of brightness (as it is so much more than just looking "brighter") as a foundation for any claims.
I haven't had the chance to try the Alienware (or the older Samsung and Viewsonic 3D monitors), but I can report that I am happy with the Acer.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at [url="http://www.daves3dphotography.com"]www.daves3dphotography.com[/url] - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compatible IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
I haven't had the chance to try the Alienware (or the older Samsung and Viewsonic 3D monitors), but I can report that I am happy with the Acer.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at www.daves3dphotography.com - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compatible IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
[quote name='DaveJes1979' post='999756' date='Feb 11 2010, 04:13 PM']I haven't had the chance to try the Alienware (or the older Samsung and Viewsonic 3D monitors), but I can report that I am happy with the Acer.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at [url="http://www.daves3dphotography.com"]www.daves3dphotography.com[/url] - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compstiable IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.[/quote]
I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
[quote name='DaveJes1979' post='999756' date='Feb 11 2010, 04:13 PM']I haven't had the chance to try the Alienware (or the older Samsung and Viewsonic 3D monitors), but I can report that I am happy with the Acer.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at www.daves3dphotography.com - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compstiable IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
[quote name='MistaP' post='999759' date='Feb 11 2010, 02:26 PM']I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.[/quote]
I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in [url="http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=11180"]these jps shots from Mirror's Edge[/url]?
[quote name='MistaP' post='999759' date='Feb 11 2010, 02:26 PM']I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
[quote name='rkuo' post='999773' date='Feb 11 2010, 04:47 PM']I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in [url="http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=11180"]these jps shots from Mirror's Edge[/url]?[/quote]
Honestly, I bought the Alienware because of how good it was for 2d gaming (in a competative fps environment the 120hz refresh is priceless) ... the 3d was just an afterthought.
I can't speak for the acer but I am expecting Mirror's Edge will ghost bad like it does everywhere else LCD wise. It does ghost bad (how bad compared the viewsonic and samsung I dont know I never had them. I would expect not as bad as the ghosting problem, as I come to undetstand from multiple people who had the old ones and got the Alienware it is much improved and then on some side by sides the Acer seems a bit better on ghosting than the Alienware) on my Alienware, but is the only game I have tried thusfar where the ghosting was such an issue. I would take some pics or whatever but I am not at home.
[quote name='rkuo' post='999773' date='Feb 11 2010, 04:47 PM']I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
Honestly, I bought the Alienware because of how good it was for 2d gaming (in a competative fps environment the 120hz refresh is priceless) ... the 3d was just an afterthought.
I can't speak for the acer but I am expecting Mirror's Edge will ghost bad like it does everywhere else LCD wise. It does ghost bad (how bad compared the viewsonic and samsung I dont know I never had them. I would expect not as bad as the ghosting problem, as I come to undetstand from multiple people who had the old ones and got the Alienware it is much improved and then on some side by sides the Acer seems a bit better on ghosting than the Alienware) on my Alienware, but is the only game I have tried thusfar where the ghosting was such an issue. I would take some pics or whatever but I am not at home.
Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.
Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.
[quote name='Spikey101' post='999816' date='Feb 12 2010, 12:00 AM']Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.[/quote]
compared? but can you actually get the Acer anywhere in UK at this time? Even AW is only available from Dell at this point if I'm not mistaken. Do you know otherwise?
As a side note, I haven't seen any of the two in action, but the faster response and the extra 0.6" diagonal would make me still pick Acer, unless they delay it much longer.
And when it comes to vividness/brightness for photography (or general 2D use), the final verdict can only be given after both have been properly calibrated (with the same instrument), and are used on the same machine.
Otherwise it's all subjective and sample dependent. For example another user claims elsewhere quite the contrary: that in fact the Acer was more vivid and sharper/detailed (albeit admitedly less bright) while AW was washed out... make up your own mind as you wish :D
[quote name='Spikey101' post='999816' date='Feb 12 2010, 12:00 AM']Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.
compared? but can you actually get the Acer anywhere in UK at this time? Even AW is only available from Dell at this point if I'm not mistaken. Do you know otherwise?
As a side note, I haven't seen any of the two in action, but the faster response and the extra 0.6" diagonal would make me still pick Acer, unless they delay it much longer.
And when it comes to vividness/brightness for photography (or general 2D use), the final verdict can only be given after both have been properly calibrated (with the same instrument), and are used on the same machine.
Otherwise it's all subjective and sample dependent. For example another user claims elsewhere quite the contrary: that in fact the Acer was more vivid and sharper/detailed (albeit admitedly less bright) while AW was washed out... make up your own mind as you wish :D
You can pre-order the Acer from quite a few places. I found it for 278 pounds on dabs to preorder. 380 with the glasses. AW is 370 on pcbuyit and 450 on dell.co.uk. So yeah, looks like the Acer will be a lot cheaper.
You can pre-order the Acer from quite a few places. I found it for 278 pounds on dabs to preorder. 380 with the glasses. AW is 370 on pcbuyit and 450 on dell.co.uk. So yeah, looks like the Acer will be a lot cheaper.
[quote name='Spikey101' post='999816' date='Feb 12 2010, 12:00 AM']Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.[/quote]
I totaly agree, it's really to expensive for a 23" TN pannel. /down.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':down:' />
[quote name='Spikey101' post='999816' date='Feb 12 2010, 12:00 AM']Just a shame that in the UK the alienware is rediculously expensive compared to the Acer. The review actually swayyed me to the AW... But it just costs too much over here.
I totaly agree, it's really to expensive for a 23" TN pannel. /down.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':down:' />
I forgot to ask this too but please compare the Alienware and Acer monitors directly on a high contrast scene like the Mirror's Edge screenshots at 110 Hz. Lowering the refresh rate slightly is one of the best ways to reduce the stereo extinction issues.
I forgot to ask this too but please compare the Alienware and Acer monitors directly on a high contrast scene like the Mirror's Edge screenshots at 110 Hz. Lowering the refresh rate slightly is one of the best ways to reduce the stereo extinction issues.
[quote name='rkuo' post='1000292' date='Feb 12 2010, 06:43 PM']Lowering the refresh rate slightly is one of the best ways to reduce the stereo extinction issues.[/quote]
is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
[quote name='rkuo' post='1000292' date='Feb 12 2010, 06:43 PM']Lowering the refresh rate slightly is one of the best ways to reduce the stereo extinction issues.
is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
As a 2D gamer that is interested in entering the 3D arena, I am very grateful to you gekko3558 for the informative reviews. It didn't really give the answers I wanted to hear, but I appriciate your honesty. I have to say I'm not really bothered about the frame and stand, it's the quality of the panel that bothers me, and also the quantity, as I have become accustomed to my 24" screen. So I guess my decision still remains a tough 1, I guess what I'm after is the picture quality of the AW in a 24" [or maybe 23.6"] monitor. Maybe I'll just have to wait a while.
As a 2D gamer that is interested in entering the 3D arena, I am very grateful to you gekko3558 for the informative reviews. It didn't really give the answers I wanted to hear, but I appriciate your honesty. I have to say I'm not really bothered about the frame and stand, it's the quality of the panel that bothers me, and also the quantity, as I have become accustomed to my 24" screen. So I guess my decision still remains a tough 1, I guess what I'm after is the picture quality of the AW in a 24" [or maybe 23.6"] monitor. Maybe I'll just have to wait a while.
[quote name='abramburici' post='1000401' date='Feb 12 2010, 02:05 PM']is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?[/quote]
Because 100Hz causes perceptible flicker. 110Hz might for some folks as well, but it works well for me. And yes, it helps because the monitor has slightly more time to get and keep the correct frame up before transitioning to the next frame.
[quote name='abramburici' post='1000401' date='Feb 12 2010, 02:05 PM']is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
Because 100Hz causes perceptible flicker. 110Hz might for some folks as well, but it works well for me. And yes, it helps because the monitor has slightly more time to get and keep the correct frame up before transitioning to the next frame.
[quote name='Obone' post='1000411' date='Feb 12 2010, 04:25 PM']As a 2D gamer that is interested in entering the 3D arena, I am very grateful to you gekko3558 for the informative reviews. It didn't really give the answers I wanted to hear, but I appriciate your honesty. I have to say I'm not really bothered about the frame and stand, it's the quality of the panel that bothers me, and also the quantity, as I have become accustomed to my 24" screen. So I guess my decision still remains a tough 1, I guess what I'm after is the picture quality of the AW in a 24" [or maybe 23.6"] monitor. Maybe I'll just have to wait a while.
Thanks again gekko :).[/quote]
I went from a 24" 1920x1200 to the AW 23" 1920x1080 ... you dont really lose any considerable screen size.
[quote name='Obone' post='1000411' date='Feb 12 2010, 04:25 PM']As a 2D gamer that is interested in entering the 3D arena, I am very grateful to you gekko3558 for the informative reviews. It didn't really give the answers I wanted to hear, but I appriciate your honesty. I have to say I'm not really bothered about the frame and stand, it's the quality of the panel that bothers me, and also the quantity, as I have become accustomed to my 24" screen. So I guess my decision still remains a tough 1, I guess what I'm after is the picture quality of the AW in a 24" [or maybe 23.6"] monitor. Maybe I'll just have to wait a while.
Thanks again gekko :).
I went from a 24" 1920x1200 to the AW 23" 1920x1080 ... you dont really lose any considerable screen size.
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?[/quote]
For me, and the more I've thought about this. I would pay $500-600 for the AW... I just feels and looks very professional. The Acer is in no way shape or form worth $400. I would not pay over $200 for it. It would be a "good" buy for $200 but asking 400 is ridiculous. Than again, im sure £1-150 is over $200 isnt it? I would pay the difference myself, because the Acer seems to only be "great" while playing 3d games and very very mediocre outside of that. While the AW is all around a superb monitor.
A note to everyone asking about pics. I had them set up side by side for pictures but my camera was dead... I am leaving directly from work for the weekend and I will try to get some pics on Sunday.
I have one picture on my phone I can email you if you guys want to message me your emails. But honestly, cameras make the brightness difference look worse than it is in real life. You can tell its brighter by a little bit, but I honestly would not pictures of brightness (as it is so much more than just looking "brighter") as a foundation for any claims.
-the one and only gekko
I would also like to see a side by side picture on a bright game or something just to get an idea of the brightness. ( if possible
From the Dell site the Alienware is £100-£150 extra compared to the Acer, in your opinion is it worth the £1-150?
For me, and the more I've thought about this. I would pay $500-600 for the AW... I just feels and looks very professional. The Acer is in no way shape or form worth $400. I would not pay over $200 for it. It would be a "good" buy for $200 but asking 400 is ridiculous. Than again, im sure £1-150 is over $200 isnt it? I would pay the difference myself, because the Acer seems to only be "great" while playing 3d games and very very mediocre outside of that. While the AW is all around a superb monitor.
A note to everyone asking about pics. I had them set up side by side for pictures but my camera was dead... I am leaving directly from work for the weekend and I will try to get some pics on Sunday.
I have one picture on my phone I can email you if you guys want to message me your emails. But honestly, cameras make the brightness difference look worse than it is in real life. You can tell its brighter by a little bit, but I honestly would not pictures of brightness (as it is so much more than just looking "brighter") as a foundation for any claims.
-the one and only gekko
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at [url="http://www.daves3dphotography.com"]www.daves3dphotography.com[/url] - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compatible IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at www.daves3dphotography.com - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compatible IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at [url="http://www.daves3dphotography.com"]www.daves3dphotography.com[/url] - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compstiable IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.[/quote]
I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
Ghosting in the Acer goes down to very low levels once the monitor has had a few minutes to warm up. I don't care for cranked up brightness, and I find the Acer monitor is only a little less bright than the HP monitor (an IPS panel) I use. But I'm not a gamer, I'm using the monitors for editing and viewing my own stereo photos. So I'm not trying to get ultra vivid or bright colors, I'm trying to get neutral reproduction. (Those who are interested can read my full review at www.daves3dphotography.com - if the moderators will allow me to link myself).
The Acer stand doesn't bother me - I can buy a third party stand for very low cost if I ever find it a hindrance, far less than $100. I don't know why folks get caught up on this issue.
The bottom line is that for desktop monitors there are no alternatives to the Acer and Alienware monitors in terms of image quality and resolution. And there are no products on the horizon which will be a significant improvement. Asus will supposedly have a 27" monitor with identical resolution (1920x1080), due out this summer, and Viewsonic will have an LED-backlight 23.6" V3D241wm-LED (Bloody from the 3D Vision blog suggests that this uses the same panel as the Acer). None of these promise to eliminate or substantially decrease ghosting. And there are no 3D Vision-compstiable IPS panels that have been announced, nor any 2560x1600 monitors planned.
If you are in the market for a 1080p 3D Vision desktop monitor, now is the time to jump in with either the Acer or the Alienware monitors. I wouldn't try and wait for the next best thing.
I have heard mostly good things about the Alienware, and I can personally attest that I am very satisfied with the Acer. I would rather throw out my Hewlett Packard IPS monitor (more expensive than the Acer or Alienware monitors) than be forced to part from my Acer and the 3D world it opens up for me.
I love my Alienware. I was gunning for the Acer but the AW dropped first. I don't know why people fret about the stand. The monitor I used before was the Acer G24 (not 3d but a great gaming monitor) which kicked absolute booooootay and I loved it. It entire bezel around the screen is the same color orange. Big deal. I am looking at the screen not the stand and not the bezel. Then again my house is a mess and I never make an attempt at cleaning it up. Some people like their desktop to look amazing. I guess I can understand that but I dont have time for it. Haha.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.[/quote]
I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in [url="http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=11180"]these jps shots from Mirror's Edge[/url]?
I havn't tried the Acer, but the consensus seems to be the Alienware is slightly brighter and has slightly more rich colors and the Acer has slightly better 3d in respect to ghosting. Slightly this slightly that they are both turn out to be very good panels.
I love my Alienware, and I expect those who have the Acer will love their Acer.
I think we're going to need more objective comparisons here in the form of shots through lenses or comparisons with known scenes. Let's be frank ... most of the image quality characteristics in 2D are irrelevant or go out the window with 3D glasses on. The brightness goes to 1/4 at best and the lenses will give everything a yellowish tint. With the state this technology is in, it's fair to describe regular 2D image quality issues but I think they pale in comparison to the stereo extinction issues that are plaguing these LCD's. If I cared about image quality, I would get an IPS panel.
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in these jps shots from Mirror's Edge?
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in [url="http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=11180"]these jps shots from Mirror's Edge[/url]?[/quote]
Honestly, I bought the Alienware because of how good it was for 2d gaming (in a competative fps environment the 120hz refresh is priceless) ... the 3d was just an afterthought.
I can't speak for the acer but I am expecting Mirror's Edge will ghost bad like it does everywhere else LCD wise. It does ghost bad (how bad compared the viewsonic and samsung I dont know I never had them. I would expect not as bad as the ghosting problem, as I come to undetstand from multiple people who had the old ones and got the Alienware it is much improved and then on some side by sides the Acer seems a bit better on ghosting than the Alienware) on my Alienware, but is the only game I have tried thusfar where the ghosting was such an issue. I would take some pics or whatever but I am not at home.
Can those of you with the Acer describe the kind of ghosting you see in these jps shots from Mirror's Edge?
Honestly, I bought the Alienware because of how good it was for 2d gaming (in a competative fps environment the 120hz refresh is priceless) ... the 3d was just an afterthought.
I can't speak for the acer but I am expecting Mirror's Edge will ghost bad like it does everywhere else LCD wise. It does ghost bad (how bad compared the viewsonic and samsung I dont know I never had them. I would expect not as bad as the ghosting problem, as I come to undetstand from multiple people who had the old ones and got the Alienware it is much improved and then on some side by sides the Acer seems a bit better on ghosting than the Alienware) on my Alienware, but is the only game I have tried thusfar where the ghosting was such an issue. I would take some pics or whatever but I am not at home.
compared? but can you actually get the Acer anywhere in UK at this time? Even AW is only available from Dell at this point if I'm not mistaken. Do you know otherwise?
As a side note, I haven't seen any of the two in action, but the faster response and the extra 0.6" diagonal would make me still pick Acer, unless they delay it much longer.
And when it comes to vividness/brightness for photography (or general 2D use), the final verdict can only be given after both have been properly calibrated (with the same instrument), and are used on the same machine.
Otherwise it's all subjective and sample dependent. For example another user claims elsewhere quite the contrary: that in fact the Acer was more vivid and sharper/detailed (albeit admitedly less bright) while AW was washed out... make up your own mind as you wish :D
compared? but can you actually get the Acer anywhere in UK at this time? Even AW is only available from Dell at this point if I'm not mistaken. Do you know otherwise?
As a side note, I haven't seen any of the two in action, but the faster response and the extra 0.6" diagonal would make me still pick Acer, unless they delay it much longer.
And when it comes to vividness/brightness for photography (or general 2D use), the final verdict can only be given after both have been properly calibrated (with the same instrument), and are used on the same machine.
Otherwise it's all subjective and sample dependent. For example another user claims elsewhere quite the contrary: that in fact the Acer was more vivid and sharper/detailed (albeit admitedly less bright) while AW was washed out... make up your own mind as you wish :D
I totaly agree, it's really to expensive for a 23" TN pannel.
I totaly agree, it's really to expensive for a 23" TN pannel.
is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
is that so, why? because each frame "stays" longer on screen and the monitor has more time to respond?
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
Thanks again gekko :).
Thanks again gekko :).
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?[/quote]
Because 100Hz causes perceptible flicker. 110Hz might for some folks as well, but it works well for me. And yes, it helps because the monitor has slightly more time to get and keep the correct frame up before transitioning to the next frame.
well, if that's the case then why doesn't everybody lower their refresh rate to the lowest allowed value (100 Hz or whatever that is), and forget completely about the extinction? Or am I missing something?
Because 100Hz causes perceptible flicker. 110Hz might for some folks as well, but it works well for me. And yes, it helps because the monitor has slightly more time to get and keep the correct frame up before transitioning to the next frame.
Thanks again gekko :).[/quote]
I went from a 24" 1920x1200 to the AW 23" 1920x1080 ... you dont really lose any considerable screen size.
Thanks again gekko :).
I went from a 24" 1920x1200 to the AW 23" 1920x1080 ... you dont really lose any considerable screen size.