AW3821DW (Nov 2020) with GSync Ultimate

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,717
My AW3420DW didn't have HDR and I really liked that monitor for it's beautiful vibrant colors and fast gaming feeling.

So maybe I'll just use this 38" UW the same, no HDR, just set it for gaming and vibrant colors.
 

jacuzz1

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
7,117
Probably going to box up the AW3821DW and return it, and I'm back on my AW3420DW that I have custom calibrated and the picture looks at good as I can get this type of display to be, punchy colors, and decent blacks.

The AW3821DW had really bad backlight bleeding, like in dark scenes and even booting up Windows and the the black screen would be dark grey on the sides, and very light grey in the middle. not even remotely BLACK, but grey to light grey.. Don't know why, but this 3420 seems to have deeper richer colors than the 3821.

Anyways, I'll wait for the AW3423DW to come back in stock one day at Microcenter, both stores near me always show it Sold Out lately

Oh yeah, the size difference between the 34" and 38", yes the 38" is nicer no question, but honestly, between the two not a night and day difference, I had my 38" pushed further back on the desk to be able to see the sides better, but with the 34" I move it closer towards me, and now there's barely much difference to me, size wise. But 3440 X 1440 is much easier to crank out high FPS than it is on the 38", but really it was the washed out look on the 38" everything seemed very light, no matter what settings I adjusted or tried custom ICC profiles, I couldn't get it to look as vibrant or deep as the 3420. Oh well, I guess I'll wait for the OLED.
Mine is perfect, no bleed, no dead pixels, just perfect. I have a 32 right next to it now( all be it 1440P) if only I had a screen that was 49 inches wide but 1600p Nirvana I say.
 

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,717
Mine is perfect, no bleed, no dead pixels, just perfect. I have a 32 right next to it now( all be it 1440P) if only I had a screen that was 49 inches wide but 1600p Nirvana I say.

The size and curve of this display is darn near perfect. To me 34" was just a bit too small and narrow, but 42" 16:9 displays were far too large and square. 38" Ultrawide is pretty much perfect.

I guess my only beef with this 38 AW is the blacks are nowhere near what the Asus ROG 42 OLED had, and of course they won't be, IPS vs OLED are radically different, but holy cow the deep blacks on that Asus OLED were sick and just amazing, the blacks on the Alienware are more dark grey to light grey, never even close to inky black like OLED.

But the vibrant colors and bright display on this AW 38 are awesome and for World of Warcraft this monitor is awesome.
 

Surly

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Messages
358
I said it before and I'll say it again, the 38" 21:9 form factor is absolutely perfect imo. Its a shame that it hasnt taken off at all. 3840x1600 is a fantastic resolution, but i feel the 38" size could also easily handle 5120x2160 too.
 

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
10,717
I said it before and I'll say it again, the 38" 21:9 form factor is absolutely perfect imo. Its a shame that it hasnt taken off at all. 3840x1600 is a fantastic resolution, but i feel the 38" size could also easily handle 5120x2160 too.

You also have the AW38?

Yeah the size and curve of this display is darn near perfect I just love it :) Plus 21:9 aspect ratio blows away 16:9
 

Surly

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Messages
358
You also have the AW38?

Yeah the size and curve of this display is darn near perfect I just love it :) Plus 21:9 aspect ratio blows away 16:9

No i have a 3 year old LG 34" but would have upgraded to the 38" until all of these OLEDs turned up complicating things. But I am definitely a gigantic 21:9 zealot which is why even though I am eyeballing a C2 it is with definite mixed feelings...
 

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
5,257
Thanks. What about Dark Stabilizer setting?

That reduces contrast ratio to bring up black gamma and make dark things easier to see. It more or less alters the low end of the gamma curve to be more like sRGB or BT1886 instead of pure power gamma. I tend to leave it off, since it does hurt contrast, unless it is a game that has lots of dark detail that is hard to see.

And for World of Warcraft I tried it in Windows 11 HDR off and it looked so much nicer. For some reason with HDR on in Windows 11 and playing Warcraft game got too bright in some areas and looked off. And general desktop use looks much sharper and nicer with HDR off on this monitor.

Some of that is down to tweaking HDR setting, some of that is down to the variable backlights, but also it is color space. The monitor is wide gamut. HDR mode corrects for that, and displays standard gamut content in standard gamut. SDR mode does not. For some people, like me, the pop of the additional color is nice in games in particular which leaving it in SDR gets you.

I leave mine set to SDR at all time unless I am play a game I want to use HDR in, which is only occasional since while the HDR on this monitor isn't unusable, it isn't great.

But on the flip side, playing Halo Infinite with HDR off looked kinda dull, it didn't have that super cool look like HDR gives, but Halo looked amazing on the Asus ROG 42 OLED, that monitor made the game look insane.

Some games may be better mastered for HDR, and may be worth using even with the monitor's somewhat lackluster support for it. Hitman 3 is one I've found like that. On a balance, I think it looks better in HDR mode than SDR mode, despite the monitor's limitations. You just have to try them and see. None will look anywhere near as good as an OLED since those are per-pixel HDR and this thing only has 32 zones.

So for gaming what Visual Backlight mode? And what Dark Stabilizer setting?

For SDR gaming I play around with the variable backlight. Either off or mode 1 usually. Mode 0 tends to be a little overly noticeable on the flickering. Can be nice for 16:9 games though as it'll make the edges darker. It really varies if I find the increased flickering worth the increased contrast of mode 1. I use it sometimes, other times I don't. Dark stabilizer I've never actually found a game that I wanted it on for. Basically where to try it is if you are in a dark game, or a game that is bright with dark areas, and you are having trouble with the detail of dark stuff. Click it up a notch, see if that helps, if not click it up another notch.

Respond Time: Fast. Is that good setting?

Yes. I have a post earlier in the thread about it but fast offers very quick response time with almost no inverse ghosting. So overall the best image quality. Faster does slightly faster transitions, but you do get visible inverse ghosting at this level. I guess maybe if you are playing a really competitive game you find it worthwhile to have some artifacts but I don't. Fastest pushes it way too hard and there are lots of noticeable inverse ghost artifacts. Do note if you want to play around with looking at them you have to close the menu after changing them. The monitor is always using "fast" when the menu is open, so if you are switching them around thinking "man I don't notice any difference," well, you don't. Have to close the menu, then you can see the difference.

Game Enhance mode: Off. Is that ok?

Ya it doesn't do anything useful IMO.
 

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
5,257
You also have the AW38?

Yeah the size and curve of this display is darn near perfect I just love it :) Plus 21:9 aspect ratio blows away 16:9
It's better than 21:9 actually, it's 24:10, meaning 2.4:1. I not only find that is a really great ratio, but it is something you find a non-trivial amount of media in. 2.39:1 is a REALLY common anamorphic movie format, both Panavision and Cinemascope make lenses for it and 2.4:1 is common for digital shooting, for example Wanda Vision is 2.4:1 in the "modern" scenes.

21:9 is close and is not bad at all, but I like 2.4:1 better which this monitor is.
 
Top