
Introduction
Gaming screens are certainly a big focus in the
monitor market at the moment, spurred on by the arrival of new variable refresh
rate technologies from NVIDIA (G-sync) and AMD (FreeSync). Over the last year
we've seen fast TN Film gaming screens released with new 27" 2560 x 1440 panels.
The
Asus ROG Swift PG278Q and
BenQ XL2730Z spring to mind as two excellent gaming screens built around
this resolution, and combining it with variable refresh rate support. As well as
developments in the TN Film gaming space we've also finally seen the release of
high refresh rate IPS-type panels, in the form of models like the
Acer XB270HU and
Asus MG279Q - again with G-sync and FreeSync respectively. These have
brought about some positive changes in the gaming space, finally allowing users
to experience the benefits of IPS technology from a gaming display.
Also within the last year we've seen a steady
increase in new ultra-wide screens offering 21:9 aspect ratios and some large
screen sizes up to 34". Normal flat models like the
LG 34UM95 were followed by a new breed of curved 34" screens like the
Dell U3415W for instance. The ultra-wide screens have attracted a lot of
interest from users as a good substitute for dual-screen operation, while also
offering a very interesting possibility for multimedia and gaming thanks to
their format and high 3440 x 1440 resolutions. Curved screens provide some
immersion improvements (in our opinion) and feel a little more comfortable than
flat models given their size and width.
A few manufacturers are now starting to invest in
34" screens which are specifically being targeted at gamers. The first to be
released was the
Acer Predator XR341CK, a 34" curved screen built around an
IPS panel and supporting AMD FreeSync variable refresh rate technology and a
maximum refresh rate boosted to 75Hz. We tested that a few months ago although
it's still to be released in the UK at the time of writing this. We now
have their G-sync equivalent with us for a full review, which is called the
Predator X34. Some aspects of the design have been changed, and the refresh rate
has even been boosted from the 75Hz offered on the XR341CK, to a reported 100Hz
maximum. This is an "overclocked" refresh rate function which we will
investigate during the course of this review. The X34 supports NVIDIA G-sync
instead of AMD FreeSync, and so the retail price is a little higher than the
XR341CK because of the additional G-sync module which is built in to the
monitor. There is sadly no ULMB mode or 3D vision support on this model, but
G-sync V II has allowed Acer to add an HDMI input at least where older G-sync
screens were limited to DisplayPort only.
If you appreciate the review
and enjoy reading and like our work, we would welcome a
donation
to the site to help us continue to make quality and detailed reviews for you. We
worked overtime to bring you this review nice and quickly as we know how excited
people were to see how this screen performs.
Check Pricing and Buy - Direct Links
|
Amazon USA |
Amazon UK |
Overclockers UK |
Amazon GER |
Amazon CAN
|
TFTCentral is a participant
in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Programme, an affiliate
advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn
advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk,
Amazon.de, Amazon.ca and other Amazon stores worldwide. We also
participate in a similar scheme for Overclockers.co.uk. |

Specifications and Features
The following table gives detailed information
about the specs of the screen:
Monitor
Specifications |
Size |
34"WS (87 cm) |
Panel Coating |
Light AG coating |
Aspect Ratio |
21:9 |
Interfaces |
1x DisplayPort 1.2a
1x HDMI 1.4
|
Resolution |
3440 x 1440 |
Pixel Pitch |
0.233 mm |
Design
colour |
Matte black bezel with dark silver aluminium
trim, and dark silver aluminium stand |
Response Time |
4ms G2G |
Ergonomics |
Tilt, 130mm height |
Static Contrast Ratio |
1000:1 |
Dynamic Contrast Ratio |
100 million:1 |
VESA Compatible |
Yes 100mm |
Brightness |
300 cd/m2 |
Accessories |
Power brick and cable, DisplayPort, HDMI and USB cables |
Viewing Angles |
178 / 178 |
Panel Technology |
LG.Display AH-IPS |
Weight |
net: 9.9Kg |
Backlight Technology |
W-LED |
Physical Dimensions |
(WxHxD) with stand:
825.1 x 455.9 - 585.9 x 309 mm |
Colour Depth |
1.07b |
Refresh Rate |
60Hz native
Up to 100z max overclocked
G-sync range 30 - 100Hz |
Special
Features |
4x
USB 3.0 ports (with charging capability), headphone port, NVIDIA
G-sync, 2x
7W speakers, ambient light system |
Colour Gamut |
Standard gamut
~sRGB, ~72% NTSC |
The Predator X34 offers a limited range of
connectivity options given the use of a G-sync module. However, these have
improved since the early G-sync capable screens which only featured a single
DisplayPort interface. This model offers DP 1.2a and an additional HDMI 1.4
input as well which is useful. The digital interfaces are HDCP certified for
encrypted content and the video cables are provided in the box for DisplayPort
and HDMI, along with a USB cable. Unlike the FreeSync XR341CK model, this X34
does not feature PiP or PbP options due to the limited video interfaces.

Above: Acer
Predator X34 boxed up
The screen has an external power supply brick
which comes
packaged along with the power cable you need. There are also 4x USB 3.0 ports,
located on the back of the screen next to the video and power
connections. Two have charging capabilities as well. There are also some 2x 7W
DTS sound integrated speakers, but no further extras like card readers, ambient light sensors or human motion sensors
provided as those are more aimed at office uses, while this is primarily a
gaming screen.
Below is a summary of the features and connections
of the screen:
Feature |
Yes / No |
Feature |
Yes / No |
Tilt adjust |
 |
DVI |
 |
Height adjust |
 |
HDMI |
 |
Swivel adjust |
 |
D-sub |
 |
Rotate adjust |
 |
DisplayPort |
 |
VESA compliant |
 |
Component |
 |
USB 2.0 Ports |
 |
Composite |
 |
USB 3.0 Ports |
 |
Audio connection |
 |
Card Reader |
 |
HDCP Support |
 |
Ambient Light Sensor |
 |
MHL Support |
 |
Human Motion Sensor |
 |
Integrated Speakers |
 |
Touch Screen |
 |
PiP / PbP |
 |
Factory Calibration |
 |
Blur Reduction Mode |
 |
Hardware calibration |
 |
G-Sync |
 |
Uniformity correction |
 |
FreeSync |
 |

Design and Ergonomics


Above: front views of the screen. Click for larger versions
The Predator X34 comes in a black and silver design
with a mixture of matte and glossy plastics used and some aluminium for
the base. The screen has a "borderless" black plastic edge around the
sides and top measuring ~1.5mm in thickness. Inside of that the panel also
has a ~11mm border before the image starts, giving a total of ~12.5mm
around the sides as a border. Along the bottom edge of the screen a matte
black plastic with a lined grid pattern on it.

Above:
Predator logo on front bottom bezel. Click for larger version
There is a dark silver aluminium style trim in the
middle as you can see from the picture above with a "Predator" logo on it.
There is no Acer designation on the screen front. This bottom edge of the
screen measures ~24.5mm in thickness (with the panel having an additional
~2.5mm edge as well along the bottom). There is an almost-invisible power logo next to where the power LED
is in the bottom right hand corner. The power LED is very small and glows
blue during normal operation, amber in standby. The OSD control buttons
are located underneath the bottom edge in the right hand corner.


Above: rear
views of the screen. Click for larger versions
The back of the screen is a glossy black
plastic which attracts finger prints and dust quite easily. Although since
it's on the back of the screen it doesn't prove a problem when it's sat on
your desk really. From behind the screen looks pretty cool we think and we
liked the red trim of the cable tidy. The stand attaches at the back and is screwed in to
place by 4 screws (with little rubber covers) since the whole screen is
heavy and a quick release mechanism would probably not be sufficient to
keep it safe. We will look at the stand in a moment. The connections for
video etc are on the back of the screen near the bottom as you can see
from the above images.

Above: side
views of the screen. Click for larger versions
The screen itself is fairly thin given the
LED backlighting and external power supply. The stand however is very deep
and since it has a 3 pronged style you do need to have all 3 points on
your desk. Had it been a flat, square stand you could have in theory had
it overhanging the edge of the desk a bit (assuming you've got a wall
behind it) if you wanted to move it back a little bit. As it is, on fairly
shallow desks it sits quite a long way forward towards the user. The base
is 309mm (30.9cm) deep so you probably need a fairly deep desk to be able
to have it at a comfortable distance away. It looks stylish and pretty
sleek, but it was a bit impractical we felt for some people.


Above: rear
views of the back of the screen and stand. Click for larger versions
The stand is a dark silver aluminium frame
with black plastic central section, and provides a strong, sturdy and
heavy base for the big display. It can be unscrewed if you want and the
screen is VESA 100mm compliant for wall or arm mounting. The stand has a
useful carry handle at the top as the screen is big and very heavy. There
is a cable tidy hole at the bottom as well which is highlighted in a red
colour and looks nice. The stand on the Predator X34 is a dark colour
unlike the light silver colour of the XR341CK model and we prefer the
design here.

Above:
view from above.
The screens curvature can be seen from the
above images. There are some ergonomic adjustments offered
from the stand, with the main tilt and height adjustments being present.
Above: full
range of tilt adjustment shown. Click for larger versions
The tilt function is smooth but quite stiff to move, but it does offer a
very wide range of angles to choose from as
shown above.

Above: full
range of height adjustment shown. Click for larger versions
Height adjustment is also smooth but very stiff
to move, to the point of almost having to force it to get it moving at
all. At the lowest height setting the bottom edge of the
screen is approximately 40mm from the edge of the desk. At the maximum
setting it is ~190mm, and so there is a 150 mm total adjustment range
available here. There are no side to side swivel or rotate adjustments
offered. Swivel would have been handy since the base is heavy and you
can't really re-position the base very often without it being a pain.
Rotation into portrait mode would have been impractical on a screen this
size anyway so isn't missed.
A summary of the screens ergonomic adjustments
is shown below:
Function |
Range |
Smoothness |
Ease of Use |
Tilt |
Yes |
Smooth |
Quite stiff |
Height |
150mm |
Smooth |
Very Stiff |
Swivel |
n/a |
- |
- |
Rotate |
n/a |
- |
- |
Overall |
Reasonable range of
adjustments offered, although stiff to move. |
The materials were of a good standard and the
build quality felt good as well. On the XR341CK FreeSync version we noticed a
whining noise from the screen when running at lower brightness settings. It
seemed to only kick in at about 40 brightness and below, and you can
certainly hear it as you get lower. It wasn't very loud, and sounds more like
a system fan or something like that. The pitch changed a little depending on
the content on the screen at the time. On the Predator X34 we didn't notice
this issue thankfully. There was a very slight electronic whistle from the
screen if you listened very closely, and it became a little more obvious at
low brightness settings. We have read some early buyer reports of coil whine
from the screen, particularly when
overclocked
but we didn't have any of those issue on our sample. The whole screen remained
cool even during prolonged which was pleasing.

Above: rear
views of the screen showing connections.
The back of the screen provides the
video connections as shown above. There are only DisplayPort 1.2a and HDMI 1.4
inputs on this model given the use of NVIDIA G-sync. With it being a G-sync V
II module, HDMI is at least provided to give you some further flexibility
which is nice. Only the DP can support the high refresh rates and G-sync
though. On the back there is also the power connection (external brick
provided), headphone out, USB upstream, 2x USB 3.0, 2x USB 3.0 with charging
capabilities. Unlike the XR341CK the DisplayPort input is in a more central
position, so even if your DP cable has a pressable release button on it, you
can get at it without problem.

The screen features an ambient light feature
which we quite liked. Not something we've seen before on other screens before
we tested the XR341CK a few months back, but a
fairly nifty idea we thought. An LED strip of lights is located along most of
the bottom edge of the screen which can be controlled via the OSD menu as
shown above. When turned on you can change the colour and style of this light,
which provides a nice attractive glow beamed on to the desk below. The colour
can be changed to red, green, blue, white, orange, a random setting and also 'MNT
status' (whatever that means!). You can also change the style of the light,
whether it's fixed on, breathing, flashing, or ripple. The ripple is quite
nice, moving from end to end like the light on the front of KITT in Knight
Rider (old school 80's reference!) You can also change the brightness in
settings from 1 - 5, and whether the LED stays on when the screen is asleep.

OSD Menu

Above: OSD control buttons on the underside edge of the screen. Click for
larger version
The OSD menu is accessed and controlled through a
series 5 pressable buttons, along with a power on/off button. These are all
located on the underside edge of the screen in the bottom right hand corner.
There's no labels on the front of the screen other than a very subtle power logo
above the power on/off button so sometimes it's a bit tricky to know which
button you are pressing. In fact we did find we turned the screen off
accidentally a few times, which is even more frustrating since it takes a good 8
seconds or so to power back on (15 on the XR341CK model). The actual menu design
is a little different to the XR341CK model.

Pressing any of the buttons brings up the first
quick launch menu as shown above. From here you can access (from left to right)
the game modes, OD overdrive setting, volume control, input selection and then
the main menu. Unlike on the XR341CK you don't have to scroll right to get to
the second section and the main menu option.

If you've entered into the game modes, pressing
the same buttons brings up a slightly different quick launch menu. Instead you
now have access to the 3 saveable modes, or you can scroll right to get to the
other options as before. While we're on the subject of the game modes, we did
find that if you switch the game mode on, and then off again, when you go back
to your previous preset mode the settings have reverted back to default,
including the brightness control.


Some of the quick launch menus are shown above,
for OD mode and volume control. The input option just switches between DP and
HDMI without popping up any menu.

Entering the main menu provides you with a wealth
of options to play with. The menu is split down the left hand side into 5
sections, with options available in each shown on the right. At the bottom the
icons tell you what each button will now do within the menu. There is also
access to the 5 preset modes at the bottom via the green 'e' icon. They are
basically just a series of 5 preset modes mostly down to different brightness
settings. If you change anything yourself in the OSD then it reverts you to the
'user' mode automatically so you can't really customise the modes how you want
unfortunately.
The first section
in the main OSD menu is the 'picture' menu with options for the eColor management preset modes,
brightness and contrast. The low blue light mode and dynamic contrast ratio (ACM)
are also provided here if you want to use them.

The eColor preset mode menu is shown above for
reference, with 5 modes available if you want.

The second section is the 'color' menu contains
options for the gamma and colour temperature modes as well as adjustments for
the RGB levels for
calibration.

The third 'OSD' section has a few options relating
to the menu itself. You can also access a couple of gaming options to display
the refresh rate currently running in the top right hand corner (maybe handy when using
G-sync) and also an 'aim
point' for shooting games.

The 'setting' section has quite a few options in
it. You can control the OD
overdrive setting here
and the
overclocking feature. There is
also access to the ambient light feature which we looked at in the previous
section. Also included are options including
the aspect ratio modes.

The final section contains a bit of info about the
current settings of the screen.
All in all the menu had a lot of options to play
with and the software looked nice and felt modern. It was a bit confusing to navigate sometimes
and not that intuitive, having to drill in to different levels and then using
lots of arrows back and forth. You sometimes find yourself having to go through
many button presses to get to an option you want.

Power Consumption
In terms of power consumption the manufacturer
lists typical usage of 54.0W, and 0.5W in standby. We carried out our normal tests to
establish its power consumption ourselves.
 |
State and Brightness
Setting |
Manufacturer Spec (W) |
Measured Power Usage
(W) |
Default (80%) |
54.0 |
56.3 |
Calibrated (36%) |
- |
40.6 |
Maximum Brightness (100%) |
- |
63.4 |
Minimum Brightness (0%) |
- |
27.1 |
Standby |
0.5 |
0.5 |
|
We tested this ourselves and found that out of the
box the screen used 56.3W at the default 80% brightness setting. Once calibrated
the screen reached 40.6W consumption, and in standby it used only 0.5W. We have
plotted these results below compared with other screens we have tested. The
calibrated consumption is very similar to the LG 34UM95 (42.0W) but a little
more than the Acer XR341CK FreeSync model (30.7W) and Dell U3415W (32.1W):


Panel and Backlighting
Panel Manufacturer |
LG.Display |
Colour Palette |
1.074 billion |
Panel Technology |
AH-IPS |
Colour Depth |
8-bit + FRC |
Panel Module |
LM340UW2-SSA1 |
Colour space |
Standard gamut |
Backlighting Type |
W-LED |
Colour space coverage (%) |
~sRGB, ~72% NTSC |
Panel Part and Colour Depth
Like the XR341CK FreeSync model, the Predator X34 features an
LG.Display LM340UW2-SSA1 AH-IPS panel which is capable of producing 1.074
billion colours. As we understand it the panel offers an 8-bit colour depth with
additional Frame Rate Control (FRC) stage added to support 10-bit content. Keep
in mind whether this is practically useable and whether you're ever going to
truly use that colour depth. You need to have a full 10-bit end to end
workflow to take advantage of it which is still quite expensive to achieve and
rare in the market, certainly for your average user. This includes relevant
applications and graphics cards as well, so to many people this 10-bit support
might be irrelevant. The part is confirmed when dismantling the screen.
Incidentally this is the same panel we saw used in the
Dell U3415W display as
well.


Screen
Coating
The
screen coating on the Predator X34 is a light anti-glare (AG) offering, the
same as that featured on the XR341CK model as well. It isn't a semi-glossy
coating, but it is light as seen on other modern IPS type panels. Thankfully it
isn't a heavily grainy coating like some old IPS panels feature and is also
lighter than modern TN Film panel coating, including popular gaming screens. It
retains its anti-glare properties to avoid too many unwanted reflections of a
full glossy coating, but does not produce an too grainy or dirty an image that
some thicker AG coatings can. There were some very slight cross-hatching
patterns visible on the coating if you looked very closely, but nothing very
obvious.
Backlight Type and Colour Gamut
The screen uses a White-LED (W-LED) backlight unit
which has become very popular in today's market. This helps reduce power
consumption compared with older CCFL backlight units and brings about some
environmental benefits as well. The W-LED unit offers a standard colour gamut
which is approximately equal to the sRGB colour space.
Anyone wanting to work with wider colour spaces would need to consider wide
gamut CCFL screens or the newer range of GB-r-LED type displays available
now. If
you want to read more about colour spaces and gamut then please have a read of
our
detailed article.
Backlight
Dimming and Flicker
We tested the screen to establish the methods used
to control backlight dimming. Our in depth article talks in more details about a
common method used for this which is called
Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). This in itself gives cause for concern to some
users who have experienced eye strain, headaches and other symptoms as a result
of the flickering backlight caused by this technology. We use a photosensor +
oscilloscope system to measure backlight dimming control
with a high level of accuracy and ease. These tests allow us to establish
1) Whether PWM is being used to control the
backlight
2) The frequency and other characteristics at which this operates, if it is used
3) Whether a flicker may be introduced or potentially noticeable at certain
settings
If PWM is used for backlight dimming, the higher
the frequency, the less likely you are to see artefacts and flicker. The duty
cycle (the time for which the backlight is on) is also important and the shorter
the duty cycle, the more potential there is that you may see flicker. The other
factor which can influence flicker is the amplitude of the PWM, measuring the
difference in brightness output between the 'on' and 'off' states. Please
remember that not every user would notice a flicker from a backlight using PWM,
but it is something to be wary of. It is also a hard thing to quantify as it is
very subjective when talking about whether a user may or may not experience the
side effects.
100% 50%
0%

Above scale = 1
horizontal grid = 5ms
At 100% brightness a constant voltage is applied
to the backlight. As you reduce the brightness setting to dim the backlight a
Direct Current (DC) method is used, as opposed to any form of PWM. This applies
to all brightness settings from 100% down to 0%. The screen is flicker free as a
result, as advertised (as was the XR341CK).
Pulse Width
Modulation Used |
No |
Cycling
Frequency |
n/a |
Possible
Flicker at |
|
100% Brightness |
No |
50% Brightness |
No |
0% Brightness |
No |
For an up to date list of all flicker-free (PWM free) monitors please see our
Flicker Free Monitor Database.

Contrast
Stability and Brightness
We wanted to see how much variance there was in
the screens contrast as we adjusted the monitor setting for brightness.
In theory, brightness and contrast are two independent parameters, and good
contrast is a requirement regardless of the brightness adjustment.
Unfortunately, such is not always the case in practice. We recorded the
screens luminance and black depth at various OSD brightness settings, and
calculated the contrast ratio from there. Graphics card settings were left at
default with no ICC profile or calibration active. Tests were made using an
X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter. It should be noted that we used the
BasICColor calibration software here to record these, and so luminance at
default settings may vary a little from the LaCie Blue Eye Pro report.
OSD
Brightness |
Luminance
(cd/m2) |
Black
Point (cd/m2) |
Contrast
Ratio
( x:1) |
100 |
294.03 |
0.28 |
1050 |
90 |
270.39 |
0.26 |
1040 |
80 |
246.31 |
0.24 |
1026 |
70 |
221.84 |
0.22 |
1008 |
60 |
195.93 |
0.19 |
1031 |
50 |
169.21 |
0.17 |
995 |
40 |
140.58 |
0.14 |
1004 |
30 |
110.55 |
0.11 |
1005 |
20 |
79.77 |
0.08 |
997 |
10 |
46.66 |
0.05 |
933 |
0 |
13.23 |
<0.02 |
- |
Total Luminance Adjustment Range
(cd/m2) |
280.80 |
Brightness OSD setting controls backlight? |
 |
Total Black Point
Adjustment Range (cd/m2) |
>0.26 |
Average Static Contrast Ratio |
1009:1 |
PWM Free? |
 |
Recommended OSD setting
for 120 cd/m2 |
33 |
The brightness control gave us a very good range
of adjustment. At the top end the maximum luminance reached 294
cd/m2 which was
just shy of the specified maximum brightness of 300 cd/m2 from the
manufacturer. There was a decent 281 cd/m2 adjustment
range in total, and so at the minimum setting you could reach down to a very low
luminance of 13 cd/m2. This should be more than adequate for those
wanting to work in darkened room conditions with low ambient light and the
screen could reach even lower than the 41 cd/m2 of the FreeSync
XR341CK model. A setting of 33 in the OSD menu should return you a
luminance of around 120 cd/m2 at default settings.
It should be noted that the
brightness regulation is controlled without the need for
Pulse Width Modulation, using a Direct Current (DC) method for all
brightness settings between 100 and 0% and so the screen is flicker free as
advertised.

We have plotted the
luminance trend on the graph above. The screen behaves as it should in this
regard, with a reduction in the luminance output of the screen controlled by the
reduction in the OSD brightness setting. This is basically a linear relationship as you
can see.

The average contrast ratio of
the screen was very good for an IPS-type panel with an average of 1009:1. This
was mostly stable across the brightness adjustment range as shown above with
some fluctuation at the lower brightness settings below 30.

Testing
Methodology
An
important thing to consider for most users is how a screen will perform out of
the box and with some basic manual adjustments. Since most users won't have
access to hardware colorimeter tools, it is important to understand how the
screen is going to perform in terms of colour accuracy for the average user.
We restored our graphics card to default settings
and disabled any previously active ICC profiles and gamma corrections. The
screen was tested at default factory settings using
an
X-rite i1
Pro Spectrophotometer (not to be confused with the i1 Display Pro
colorimeter) combined with
LaCie's Blue Eye Pro software suite. An X-rite i1 Display Pro colorimeter was
also used to verify the black point and contrast ratio since the i1 Pro
spectrophotometer is less
reliable at the darker end.
Targets for these tests are as follows:
-
CIE Diagram - validates the colour space
covered by the monitors backlighting in a 2D view, with the black triangle representing the
displays gamut, and other reference colour spaces shown for comparison
-
Gamma - we aim for 2.2 which is the default
for computer monitors
-
Colour temperature / white point - we aim
for 6500k which is the temperature of daylight
-
Luminance - we aim for 120
cd/m2, which is
the recommended luminance for LCD monitors in normal lighting conditions
-
Black depth - we aim
for as low as possible to maximise shadow detail and to offer us the best
contrast ratio
-
Contrast ratio - we aim
for as high as possible. Any dynamic contrast ratio controls are turned off here
if present
-
dE average / maximum -
as low as possible.
If DeltaE >3, the color displayed is significantly different from the
theoretical one, meaning that the difference will be perceptible to the
viewer.
If DeltaE <2, LaCie considers the calibration a success; there remains a
slight difference, but it is barely undetectable.
If DeltaE < 1, the color fidelity is excellent.

Default Performance and
Setup
Default settings of the screen were as follows:
Monitor OSD Option |
Default Settings |
Preset mode (eColor mode) |
Standard |
Brightness |
80 |
Contrast |
50 |
Colour Temp |
Warm |
RGB |
n/a |
Gamma |
2.2 |

Acer Predator X34 - Default Settings


|
Default Settings |
luminance (cd/m2) |
246 |
Black Point (cd/m2) |
0.24 |
Contrast Ratio |
1030:1 |
Initially out of the box the screen was set in the
default 'standard' eColor preset mode. You could tell the screen was using a
standard gamut backlight and the image looked pretty good, but too bright for
comfortable use. Colour balance felt good and the image quality was decent. We went ahead and measured the default state with
the i1 Pro.
The
CIE diagram on the left of the image confirms that the monitors colour gamut
(black triangle) is roughly equal to
the sRGB colour space. There is some minor over-coverage, mostly in blue and
green shades but not by anything significant.
Default gamma was recorded at 2.3 average, leaving it with a small 3% deviance
from the target which was good. The screen has 4 gamma modes available in the
OSD and by default it was set to the 2.2 gamma level. We also tested the other
gamma modes for completeness and found the 1.9 mode returned a gamma average of
1.9 as intended, the 2.5 mode delivered a 2.5 gamma average as intended, and the
'gaming' gamma mode delivered an average gamma of 2.8. These gamma preset modes
were reliable which was pleasing. We will stick with the 2.2 mode for our setup
and calibration process as it's very close to the desired 2.2 level we aim for.

White point was measured at 6178k being slightly
too warm from the target of 6500k but with a low 5% deviance. The screen was set
in the default 'warm' colour temp mode incidentally. We again tested the other
modes which returned the following colour temperature results:
Colour Temperature Modes
OSD option |
Measured white point |
Normal |
7811k |
Cool |
8687k |
Blue Light |
5112k |
User |
6178k |
Warm (Default) |
6178k |
The white point was probably best at the default
'warm' mode out of the box, and closest to our target of 6500k. The user mode is
identical but does give you access to the RGB channels to calibrate the screen
yourself. We will provide some
recommended OSD setting
adjustments in the following section to achieve a more accurate white point and
default setup, even for those without a calibration tool available so you can
try that too. Note that the low blue light mode also has another setting in the
menu for levels of blue light reduction, defaulting to 70% when you enter that
mode. There's also options for 50, 60 and 80% available.
Luminance was recorded at a very bright 246
cd/m2 which is
too high for prolonged general use. The screen was set at a default 80%
brightness in the OSD menu but that is easy to change of course to reach a more
comfortable setting without impacting any other aspect of the setup. The black
depth was 0.24 cd/m2 at this default
brightness setting, giving us a very good static contrast ratio
(for an IPS-type panel) of
1030:1.
Colour accuracy was also good out of the box
with a default dE average of 1.9, and a maximum of only 4.2. Testing the screen
with colour gradients (after V2 firmware fix, see below) revealed smooth
gradients with some minor gradation evident in darker tones as you see from most
screens.
Colour Banding (Now
Resolved)

Testing the screen with various gradients showed
an issue which some early buyers have also reported to us. The above photo
captures the problem. Red and green gradients are smooth as you would hope to
see, with only some minor gradation evident, and being typical for most
monitors. The blue gradient is an issue though and shows some obvious colour
banding. You can see defined blocks / steps in what should be a smooth
transition gradient from dark to light. This in turn affects the grey gradient
shown at the bottom since that is an amalgamation of RGB.
We tested all the
different OSD options to see if we could eliminate the problem but without any
luck. We also checked all the graphics card control panel settings, ensuring full RGB
range was selected and anything else we could think of which might cause the
problem. The result was the same from our NVIDIA and AMD test systems and so is
confirmed as a hardware issue.
This does appear to be an issue on the X34 as it can affect some
images depending on the content. Solid colour areas or gradient type content
will show this issue most, although in dynamic gaming etc it's much harder to
notice. In fact day to day it was not easy to spot unless you went looking for
it.
We have reported this issue to Acer to investigate
and will update this review later on when we receive more information.
Speculation that this might be a measure to allow for 100Hz refresh rate seems
unfounded, since 3440 x 1440 at 100Hz is within DisplayPort 1.2 bandwidth specs
without needing to adjust the colour depth. We suspect a firmware update could
address this issue with a bit of luck. We would consider this an issue at the
moment, and something likely to upset customers given the high price of an item
like this. On the plus side, the screen is barely available anywhere yet. Stock
is expected in the UK in a week or so although some retailers in Germany have
already started shipping. We hope to see a firmware update from Acer to address
this issue hopefully before it becomes widely available to buy, as it must
surely be fixable given there were no issues on the XR341CK model using the same
panel.
Update 23rd September 2015 (Banding Issue
Now Fixed)
We have had confirmation from Acer UK that ALL
UK stock arriving in to official reseller channels will have an updated V2
firmware installed by default which fixes this banding issue. This includes
stock being sent to Overclockers.co.uk, Scan, Amazon and eBuyer. So UK buyers
need not worry about this issue thankfully. We have tested the new firmware and
confirmed it resolves the blue banding issue properly.
We have asked Acer to confirm the status of
initial retail stock being sold in Germany, which at the time of writing seems
to be the only early stock available and does carry the V1 faulty firmware. We
will update this review again when we know what's happening with the small
number of those existing units, whether the user will be able to update the
screen themselves or need to send it back to Acer to do.
Again we have asked Acer to confirm the situation
outside of Europe as well, particularly in the USA with stock when it arrives
there.
Update 6th October 2015
Acer have confirmed that for any user who
purchased the screen from the very early stock available in Germany, they would
need to contact Acer service and support who will arrange a firmware update with
them. We have been unable to confirm if Acer US stock will be fixed before
shipment as we have been asked to contact Acer US directly for that
verification. We would be surprised if it was not fixed when retail stock
becomes available in the US though given it is a known issue and has been
addressed elsewhere before release.
|

Optimum OSD
Adjustments
Having tested the various settings and preset modes we thought it would be useful to summarise what we
would consider to be the optimum OSD adjustments out of the box, before any
calibration device is used to profile the screen. These are
designed to help you reach a more comfortable and reliable setup without the
need for a calibration tool. In the following section we will calibrate the
screen properly and provide a calibrated ICC profile for those who would like to
try it.
Monitor OSD Option |
Recommended Optimum Settings |
eColor preset mode |
User |
Brightness |
36 |
Contrast |
50 |
Colour Temp |
User |
RGB Gain |
49, 48, 51 |
Gamma |
2.2 |

Acer Predator X34 - Optimum OSD settings

|
Optimum OSD Settings |
luminance (cd/m2) |
121 |
Black Point (cd/m2) |
0.12 |
Contrast Ratio |
1028:1 |
By changing any of the controls in the OSD you
automatically move to the 'user' eColor preset mode anyway. We stuck with the
default 2.2 gamma mode as it was closest to our 2.2 gamma
target. We also changed to the 'user' colour temp mode which allows us to change
the RGB levels individually. By making the basic changes to the OSD menu as
listed above we were able to improve the default setup a little. We now had
a slightly more accurate gamma, being measured at 2.2 average with a minor 1%
deviance. White point was very close to our target with only a 1% deviance now, and the reduction in
the brightness control delivered a more comfortable luminance, all the while
maintaining a strong contrast ratio. The colour accuracy had also improved
slightly, with 1.7 dE average now. Proper calibration as in the following section
should help
achieve even more accurate results.

Calibration
We used the
X-rite i1 Pro spectrophotometer combined with the LaCie Blue Eye Pro
software package to achieve these results and reports. An X-rite i1 Display Pro
colorimeter was used to validate the black depth and contrast
ratios due to lower end limitations of the i1 Pro device.
Monitor OSD Option |
Calibrated OSD settings |
eColor preset mode |
User |
Brightness |
34 |
Contrast |
50 |
Colour Temp |
User |
RGB Gain |
49, 49, 51 |
Gamma |
2.2 |

Acer Predator X34 - Calibrated Settings
|
Calibrated Settings |
luminance (cd/m2) |
121 |
Black Point (cd/m2) |
0.12 |
Contrast Ratio |
1033:1 |
All the OSD
changes from the previous section allowed us to obtain an
optimum hardware starting point and setup before software level changes would be
made at the graphics card level. We left the LaCie software to calibrate
to "max" brightness which would just retain the luminance of whatever brightness
we'd set the screen to, and would not in any way try and alter the luminance at
the graphics card level, which can reduce contrast ratio. These adjustments
before profiling the screen would help preserve tonal values and limit
banding issues. After this we let the software carry out the LUT adjustments and create an
ICC profile.

Average gamma was now corrected to 2.2 average,
correcting most of the 3% deviance we'd seen out of the box and leaving a minor
1% deviance. The
white point had already been corrected nicely in the previous section through
adjustments
to the OSD RGB levels. It was maintained at an accurate level, measured at 6553k
(1% deviance). Luminance had been improved thanks to the adjustment to the
brightness control and was now being measured at 121
cd/m2. This
left us a black depth of 0.12 cd/m2 and maintained a very good static contrast ratio
(for an IPS-type panel) of
1033:1. Colour accuracy of the resulting
profile was very good on the most part, with dE average of 0.6. However there
seemed to be an issue with some shades, most notably yellow, where dE maximum reached up to
2.7.
We tried to re-calibrate the screen several times, including in the 'warm'
colour temp mode instead of 'user', but the same problem remained.
Testing the screen with colour gradients (after V2
firmware fix,
see above) revealed smooth gradients with some minor gradation evident in
darker tones as you see from most screens.
You can use our settings and
try our calibrated ICC profile if you wish, which are available in
our ICC profile database. Keep in mind that results will vary from one
screen to another and from one computer / graphics card to another.

Calibration Performance Comparisons

The comparisons made in this section try to give
you a better view of how each screen performs, particularly out of the box which
is what is going to matter to most consumers. When comparing the default factory
settings for each monitor it is important to take into account several
measurement areas - gamma, white point and colour accuracy. There's no point
having a low dE colour accuracy figure if the gamma curve is way off for
instance. A good factory calibration requires all 3 to be well set up. We have
deliberately not included luminance in this comparison since this is normally
far too high by default on every screen. However, that is very easily controlled
through the brightness setting (on most screens) and should not impact the other
areas being measured anyway. It is easy enough to obtain a suitable luminance
for your working conditions and individual preferences, but a reliable factory
setup in gamma, white point and colour accuracy is important and not as easy to
change accurately without a calibration tool.
From these comparisons we can also compare the
calibrated colour accuracy, black depth and contrast ratio. After a calibration
the gamma, white point and luminance should all be at their desired targets.

Default setup of the screen out of the box was
very good overall, with an accurate gamma curve and low dE. White point was slightly too
warm but only by a minor 5%
deviance, but contrast ratio was strong for an IPS panel. It's easy actually to
obtain a better setup even without a calibration device if you follow our
recommended
OSD settings. That helps improve the white point so
it's easy to sort that if you want to.


The display was strong when it came to black depth
and contrast ratio for an IPS-type panel. With a calibrated contrast ratio
of 1033:1 it was comparable to some of the better screens using this kind of
panel technology. It was not quite as high as the recently tested
Dell U2515H
(1138:1) which holds the record for an IPS contrast ratio. The XR341CK was ever
so slightly higher too at 1072:1. It was also very similar
to the Dell U3415W (1091:1) as you might expect given they use the exact same
panel. Of
course none of these IPS screens can compete with VA panel types which can reach over 2000:1 easily
like the 32"
BenQ BL3200PT, and
even close to 5000:1 in the case of the 24"
Eizo FG2421 and 40"
Philips BDM4065UC.
Check Pricing and Buy - Direct Links
|
Amazon USA |
Amazon UK |
Overclockers UK |
Amazon GER |
Amazon CAN
|
TFTCentral is a participant
in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Programme, an affiliate
advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn
advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk,
Amazon.de, Amazon.ca and other Amazon stores worldwide. We also
participate in a similar scheme for Overclockers.co.uk. |

Viewing Angles

Above: Viewing
angles shown from front and side, and from above and below. Click for
larger image
Viewing angles of the X34 were very good as
you would expect from an IPS panel. Horizontally there was very little colour
tone shift until wide angles past about 45°. A slight darkening of the image
occurred horizontally from wider angles as you can see above as the contrast
shifted slighting. Contrast shifts were slightly more noticeable in the vertical
field but overall they were very good. The screen offered the wide viewing
angles of IPS technology and was free from the restrictive fields of view of TN
Film panels, especially in the vertical plane. It was also free of the
off-centre contrast shift you see from VA panels and a lot of the quite obvious
gamma and colour tone shift you see from some of the modern VA panel type
offerings. All as expected really from a modern IPS panel. For a gaming screen,
this is one of the big positives of using IPS panel technology as opposed to the
common TN Film matrices which are generally adopted in gaming displays..

Above: View of an
all black screen from the side. Click for larger version
On a black image there is a characteristic white
glow when viewed from an angle, commonly referred to as "IPS-glow". This is
common on most modern IPS-type panels and can be distracting to some users. If
you view dark content from a normal head-on viewing position, you can actually
see this glow as your eyes look towards the edges of the screen. Because of the
sheer horizontal size of this 34" panel, the glow towards the edges is more
obvious than on small screens, where there isn't such a long distance from your
central position to the edges. Some people may find this problematic if they are
working with a lot of dark content or solid colour patterns. In normal day to
day uses, office work, movies and games you couldn't really notice this unless
you were viewing darker content. If you move your viewing position back, which
is probably likely for movies and games, the effect reduces as you do not have
such an extreme angle from your eye position to the screen edges. The glow
effect was a little less than on flat 34" ultra-wide screens as the curved
nature created a smaller angle between your eyes and the edges of the screen.

Above:
demonstrating IPS-glow commonly confused with backlight bleed. Click for larger
version
We want to make a point at this stage relating to
IPS glow. The above image shows the corners of the screen as observed from a
central viewing position, at a normal viewing distance of a couple of feet from
the screen. As you look towards the corners of the screen you can see a glow and
pale areas on the dark content. This is not backlight bleed! We see many reports
of users who mistake IPS glow which is a panel characteristic, for backlight
bleed which is a build quality issue. This glow in the corners is caused by your
angle of vision when viewing the screen and is because of the pixel structure on
the IPS panel. If you view the screen from even wider angles (like the image
shown above it) the glow becomes more white and pale. This IPS glow is a
"feature" of nearly every IPS-type panel on the market, so as a buyer you should
be expecting it. It's not grounds for a return of the screen as a fault when it
is just a feature of the panel technology. The bigger the screen, and the wider
the field of view, the more obvious this glowing from the corners will be. On a
34" screen like this there are very wide fields of view and so you will notice
it when sat up close to the screen and viewing dark content. If you move your
viewing position back a bit, it will be reduced.

Above: the same
side of the screen but viewed head on and from a metre or so back. Click for
larger version
If you move your viewing position back a metre or
so and view that side of the screen head on as shown above, the glow has
disappeared. You can tell there's barely any clouding or bleed from the
backlight in these corners.

Panel Uniformity
We wanted to test
here how uniform the brightness was across the screen, as well as identify any
leakage from the backlight in dark lighting conditions. Measurements of the luminance
were taken at 36 points across the panel on a pure
white background. The measurements for luminance were taken using BasICColor's calibration
software package, combined with an X-rite i1 Display Pro
colorimeter with a central point on the screen calibrated to 120 cd/m2. The below uniformity diagram shows the difference, as a percentage,
between the measurement recorded at each point on the screen, as compared with the
central reference point.
It is worth
noting that panel uniformity can vary from one screen to another, and can depend
on manufacturing lines, screen transport and other local factors. This is only a
guide of the uniformity of the sample screen we have for review.

Uniformity of Luminance

The luminance uniformity of the screen was
moderate. The
screen seemed to be darker towards the top two corners where it dropped down
by a maximum of 29% to 93 d/m2. The central and lower middle
portions of the screen were within a smaller variation from the centrally
calibrated point though, but in a couple of places the luminance did jump up
a bit to 124 d/m2 maximum. Two thirds of the screen was within a
10% deviance from the centrally calibrated point.

Backlight Leakage

Above: All black screen in a darkened room. Click for larger version
As usual we also tested the screen with an all
black image and in a darkened room. A camera was used to capture the result. The
camera showed there was some clouding
and a bit of backlight bleed detected in the corners, most noticeably on the left hand side
in the upper corner. It was not too bad
though in normal use, but you could see it with the naked eye if viewing dark
content in a dark room. Nevertheless it should not present any major problems in
regular use.

General and Office Applications
One of the key selling points of ultra-wide
screens like the this is it's high resolution and large screen size. The 3440 x
1440 display offers a sharp but comfortable picture. Its pixel area is about 1.8
times larger than an Ultra-Wide Full HD 21:9 monitor, and about 2.4 times larger
than a Full HD 16:9 monitor. It provides an efficient environment in using
Microsoft Office programs showing 47 columns and 63 rows in excel. Thankfully
the high resolution is of a very comfortable size on the 34" panel, with a
0.2325mm pixel pitch is is very comparable to a 27" 2560 x 1440 monitor
(0.2331mm). This means you are basically getting a wider desktop to work with,
with a similar font size to a 27" model, and maintaining the same vertical
resolution as well. If you're coming from a lower resolution / larger pixel
pitch you may still find the fonts look quite small to start with, but like the
27" 1440p models out there you soon get used to it. Side by side multi-tasking
on this screen is excellent and you really do have a nice wide area to work
with. We liked the curved format of the display actually for day to day office
work. It just felt a bit more comfortable than a flat screen on a model as wide
as this, bringing the corners a bit nearer to you. You didn't really notice the
curve in normal use but we liked the feel. Probably down to user taste, so if in
doubt try and see one in person.
The light AG coating of the IPS panel doesn't
produce any graininess to the image like some aggressive AG solutions can and so
white office backgrounds look clean and clear. The wide viewing angles of the
IPS panel technology provide stable images from different angles, meaning you
can use the screen if you want for colour critical work, photos etc. It might be
orientated at gamers, but it's IPS panel can deliver strong performance in other
areas as well making it a good all-rounder. This panel technology still offers
the widest viewing angles and so is well-suited to colour work. Some contrast
shifts and IPS-glow may be evident because of the very wide size of the display,
as you glance towards the edges from a centrally aligned position. That's hard
to avoid on such a large desktop monitor from close up, even with IPS
technology.
The default setup of the screen was pretty good, and easy to tweak through the
OSD to get an even better performance. We were also pleased with the strong
1033:1 contrast ratio (after calibration) as well.
The brightness
range of the screen was also very good, with the ability to offer a luminance
between 294 and 13 cd/m2. This should mean the screen is perfectly
useable in a wide variety of ambient light conditions, including darkened rooms.
A setting of ~33 in the OSD brightness control should return you a luminance
close to 120 cd/m2 out of the box. On another positive note, the brightness
regulation is controlled without the need for the use of the now infamous
Pulse-Width Modulation (PWM), and so those who suffer from eye fatigue or
headaches associated with flickering backlights need not worry.
There was some
feint audible noise whistling noise from the screen if you listened very
closely, but not to the level we'd experienced on the XR341CK. This didn't seem
to be related to refresh rate as some people have reported coil whine on their
samples. The screen also remains fairly cool even during prolonged use.
There is no specific preset mode for office work or reading so you will have to
set the user mode how you want. If you need different settings for gaming you
can save up to 3 user defined gaming modes as well which is very handy. Even with the use of G-sync
v II, the screen is limited when it comes to connectivity options
with only DP and HDMI available. Picture in Picture and Picture by Picture
options are not provided on the X34, only on the XR341CK model.
The screen offers 4x USB 3.0 ports which can be
useful and it was nice to keep this up to date with the modern version. Two
also offer charging support but both are located on the back of the display so
are not easy-access really. Integrated speakers can provide sound for the odd
YouTube clip or mp3 if you want. There are no further extras like ambient light
sensors or card readers which can be useful in office environments. Remember,
this is aimed at gamers really. There was a reasonable range of ergonomic adjustments
available from the stand allowing you to obtain a comfortable position for a
wide variety of angles. They were mostly stiff though so you might not
want to move it around too often. We did miss swivel a bit though. The VESA
mounting support may also be useful to some people as well for more flexibility.

Above: photo of
text at 3440 x 1440 (top) and 2560 x 1080 (bottom)
The screen is designed to run at its native
resolution of 3440 x 1440 and at a 60Hz native refresh rate. However,
if you want you are able to run the screen outside of this resolution. We tested
the screen at a lower 2560 x 1080 resolution to see how the screen handles the
interpolation of the resolution, while maintaining the same aspect ratio of
21:9. At native resolution the text was very sharp and clear. When running at a 1080p resolution the text is still
reasonably clear, with moderate
levels of blurring. You do lose a lot of screen real-estate as well of course
but the image seems to be quite well interpolated if needed.

Gaming Introduction

Both new Acer 34" ultra-wide screens are
gamer-orientated, pairing an ultra-wide format curved display with a couple of
gaming enhancements to deliver an interesting option for gamers. Firstly we
should consider the format of the screen, with the 34" area offering a nice
immersive experience and the wide 21:9 aspect proving popular for many gamers
since it was introduced. It's nice also that the screen offers the full 3440 x
1440 resolution currently available on models this size, as opposed to the more
limited 2560 x 1080 some 34" models have. The slight curve also adds to
immersion feeling in games and we prefer it to flat 34" ultra-wide models.
At the moment the 34" monitor space is a little
limited by the panels being manufactured. At the moment only LG.Display and
Samsung seem to be investing in this format, with nothing reported in the
roadmaps for other main manufacturers like AU Optronics or Innolux. There's
really only the choice for display manufacturers between LG.Display's IPS, and
Samsung SVA panels. That's not necessarily a bad thing as IPS is always very
popular with buyers and using an IPS panel like Acer have here, does allow them
to offer a screen suitable for a wide range of uses, not just exclusively for
gaming. There are no TN Film panels in this size and format at the moment so the
IPS option is about as good as you can get at the moment for gaming needs.
Unfortunately, IPS is somewhat limited in what it can offer. This isn't a fault
of Acer's, they are only working with what panels they have available to them
and making the most of them. IPS technology (and Samsung SVA for that matter) is
still fairly limited when it comes to pixel response times. It can't compete
with the speed of TN Film panels, and as yet LG.Display haven't found a way to
drive response times lower like AU Optronics have with their recent high refresh
rate AHVA (IPS-type) panels in the 27" space. Still, people have been using IPS
for many years for gaming so there's no reason to think that a screen like this
couldn't be used as long as the response times are handled right. We will look
at that in the next section. Sure, they won't be quite as fast as TN Film
panels, but they are still fine for many users. The availability of TN Film
panels in this format would have given Acer more choice perhaps, and the ability
to offer an even better gaming experience. Although we expect people would only
then moan about the restrictions of TN Film for other uses.
This leads us on to refresh rate. Again Acer are
limited here by what is available panel-wise. LG.Display have yet to release any
native high refresh rate (144Hz) IPS panel in any size. They have a 27" 1080p
panel expected in Q3 at some point but that's their first venture into that
space. Response times are likely to be the limiting factor in their quest, as
they need to be able to reliably drive them under 6.94ms average (without loads
of overshoot) to make 144Hz viable. We will see what they manage when they
finally release a high refresh panel later in the year - assuming a display
manufacturer picks it up. That aside, an even bigger problem is that the 3440 x
1440 resolution offered on a screen this size is too high to run at 144Hz with
current DisplayPort standards. We would need to see DisplayPort 1.3 for that
kind of bandwidth to be viable. All in all, it's likely to be a fair amount of
time before we see a 144Hz native 3440 x 1440 screen sadly. In the mean time,
Acer have done what they can with the available panel, within the confines of
what it will support from a refresh rate point of view.
Boosted Refresh Rates
On the
XR341CK model we tested before, the refresh
rate had been bumped up from the normal 60Hz to 75Hz; at least when using an AMD
graphics card. We found the 75Hz stable without frame dropping on an AMD system,
giving a small but fairly decent 25% increase in maximum refresh rate from the
panel. From NVIDIA graphics cards we found frames were dropped when pushing the
refresh rate above 60Hz. We've heard some other user reports of similar things
from NVIDIA systems on the XR341CK. For AMD users, the slight increase was welcome as it had
been paired with AMD's FreeSync technology and so this higher refresh rate
allows a wider dynamic refresh rate range to be used. 30 to 75Hz is available on
the XR341CK which is a decent range, and to be honest most of the FreeSync
benefits would be realised within that range anyway. If you've got a powerful
enough graphics card to output >75fps at 3440 x 1440 res then you can just set
vsync to off for frequencies outside of the supported range and live with a bit
of tearing, while delivering higher frame rates to the display.
The Predator X34 is a little more adventurous
though and we're excited to see how it performs. The panel being used is still a
native 60Hz panel, but Acer have built in an "overclocking" feature which allows
the user to reach up to 100Hz refresh rate maximum. Some people have moaned that
the user manual states that this is at the owners risk, which seems to go
against the advertised spec and feature list. The documentation also states it
is "up to 100Hz", so it appears to not be a guaranteed refresh rate, only what
you might be able to reach. We have asked Acer for clarification on how
using this feature might affect a users warranty, if at all, and if there are
any guidelines on what users should expect given the "up to" message. We will
update this section of the review when we have more information.
Update 6th October 2015
Acer have answered our questions about the
overclocked refresh rate. The reason for the "up to" 100Hz message is
because you can customise the maximum refresh rate you want to select in
the OSD, in 5Hz increments all the way up to 100Hz. We have been
told that overclocking does NOT affect the Acer warranty, which carries
standard warranty terms and is available via the Acer support website.
We are told that once enabled in the OSD the
monitor will report back to your operating system the supported refresh
rates and it should not matter what graphics card vendor you are using.
Based on this you should be able to get 100Hz in most cases it seems. If
you can't quite get the full 100Hz but are very close (like 95Hz for
example) we would not worry about that - just enjoy the screen!
|
This higher refresh rate support has
been paired with an
NVIDIA G-sync module, offering G-sync variable refresh rate support between
30 and 100Hz. The overclocking facility of the screen seems to be related to the
presence of a G-sync module, or perhaps more precisely down to the absence of a
built-in scaler. Future overclockable screens announced so far (e.g.
Asus ROG Swift PG279Q @ 165Hz and
Acer Predator Z35 @ 200Hz) are also G-sync capable so that seems to be the
key here.

The screen is recognised by Windows as a 60Hz
panel by default, and that's the maximum you can select when you first connect
the screen. The support for higher refresh rates is enabled via the OSD menu
using the "over clock" feature as shown above. You enable this and the monitor
reboots itself. Once that's done, in Windows you then have further options
available to select for refresh rates up to 100Hz. We will test these higher
refresh rates during the following sections of this review, checking if any
frames are dropped and if there appear to be any side effects. We will also test
these from both an NVIDIA and an AMD graphics card for comparison.
Additional Gaming Features - Where is ULMB?
Sadly one thing which is missing from the X34 is a
Blur Reduction mode. We were expecting ULMB to be available as part of the
G-sync module, but it has not been provided here. Presumably that has something
to do with the refresh rate range here, as providing ULMB at lower refresh rates
<85Hz is generally considered too flickery, and since the higher refresh rates
are not guaranteed here it was probably too much to ask for. NVIDIA 3D Vision is
also not supported, as that needs refresh rates of 120Hz minimum to function
correctly (60Hz per eye in active shutter mode).
Ultra Wide screen format |
 |
IPS-type panel technology |
 |
Max refresh rate support
|
Up to 100Hz |
G-sync support |
 |
Blur Reduction mode |
 |
NVIDIA 3D Vision |
 |
To make the most of this screen you will want to
have a
suitable NVIDIA graphics card which supports G-sync. That will allow you to use
one of the most interesting new features of this screen, the G-sync support.
Since the screen needs an additional G-sync module to make this function work,
there is an added cost compared to the XR341CK FreeSync model. As such, this
premium is unlikely to make the screen attractive to AMD users, who would
probably be better off with the XR341CK where FreeSync is supported and the
retail cost quite a bit lower.

Responsiveness and Gaming
Quoted G2G Response Time |
4ms G2G |
Quoted ISO Response Time |
n/a |
Panel Manufacturer and
Technology |
LG.Display AH-IPS |
Panel Part |
LM340UW2-SSA1 |
Overdrive Used |
Yes |
Overdrive Control Available to
User |
OD Mode |
Overdrive Settings |
Off, Normal, Extreme |
The Predator X34 is rated by Acer as having a 4ms G2G response time, which indicates the panel uses
overdrive /
response time compensation (RTC) technology to boost pixel transitions
across grey to grey changes. There is user control over the overdrive impulse
within the OSD menu using the 'OD Mode' (overdrive) option. The
part
being used is the
LG.Display AH-IPS LM340UW2-SSA1 panel, the exact same panel as
already used in the Dell U3415W display. Have a read about response time in
our
specs section if you need additional information about this measurement.
We will first test the screen using our thorough
response time testing method. This uses an oscilloscope and photosensor to
measure the pixel response times across a series of different transitions, in
the full range from 0 (black) to 255 (white). This will give us a realistic view
of how the monitor performs in real life, as opposed to being reliant only on a
manufacturers spec. We can work out the response times for changing between many
different shades, calculate the maximum, minimum and average grey
to grey (G2G) response times, and provide an evaluation of any overshoot present
on the monitor.
We use an
ETC M526
oscilloscope for these measurements along with a custom photosensor device.
Have a read of
our response time measurement article for a full explanation of the testing methodology and reported
data.
Response Time Setting Comparison

The Predator X34 comes with a user control for the
overdrive impulse available within the OSD menu in the 'setting' section, as well as via one of the quick launch options
shown above. There are 3 options available here under the
OD Mode setting. First of all we carried out a fairly small set
of measurements in all 3 of the OD Mode settings. These, along with various
motion tests allowed us to quickly identify which was the optimum overdrive setting
for this screen. Note that for now we have stuck with the native 60Hz refresh
rate of the panel. These tests are just designed to help us identify the optimal
OD setting, and we will check the response times again when we come to overclock
the refresh rate. We tested the screen from an NVIDIA and AMD system which both
delivered comparable results here.

Firstly we tested the response times with OD set to
off, effectively turning off the overdrive impulse. The average
response time was measured at 12.9ms G2G average which was actually not
that slow, but certainly not optimum for this technology. Rise times were a bit slower than fall times and there was
some obvious blurring to moving images. There was no overshoot in this mode
since OD was turned off, but we would hope for better responsiveness from the
other modes.

Switching up to the 'Normal' OD mode brought about
some positive changes to response times. G2G average had reduced down to 9.0ms
now which was better, and only a little slower than the best case 60Hz IPS
panels around, which can reach down to around 8.6ms G2G without introducing
noticeable amounts of overshoot. So 9ms G2G was not a bad performance really
from a current 60Hz IPS panel. The XR341CK display had reached down to 8.7ms G2G
in this 'Normal' OD mode, albeit from a slightly faster 75Hz refresh rate from an AMD system so it was
still very close to that. There
was some minor overshoot on a couple of transitions but this shouldn't be a
problem in actual use.

Finally we tested the 'Extreme' OD mode. There was
an improvement in measured response times down to 6.9ms G2G average. However, it
was at the cost of some very high overshoot, which was obvious and distracting
during actual use. Stick with the 'normal' OD mode.

We can also make some visual comparisons of the
three OD modes using the moving images of the PixPerAn tool. The above photos
were captured in each of the OD modes. With OD off, there was a fairly obvious
blurring to the moving image, something that was largely eliminated when
switching up to the 'normal' mode. Blurring was reduced a lot and the image
became sharper. There were no signs of noticeable overshoot either in this mode
in these tests which was pleasing. The 'extreme' mode pushed things too far, and
dark and pale overshoot trails were introduced as you can see. Stick with the
normal mode for optimal performance.

Refresh Rate

One of the most interesting features of the X34 is
the overclockable refresh rate. The panel itself is designed to run at 60Hz by
LG.Display and that's the native refresh rate you will be able to select in
Windows when you first connect the screen. However, there is a specific feature
available in the OSD menu in the 'setting' section for "over clock". This allows
you to enable the higher refresh rate support. The manual states that this is
"at the end users risk" which some people have complained about given
the advertising of the screen as supported 100Hz. The messaging on most of
Acer's documentation and websites also says that it is "up to" 100Hz which
implies results may vary perhaps. We have asked Acer for clarity on whether
using this feature in any way affects the warranty of support for the screen and
will update this review when we have more information. We've also asked if there
are any guidelines on what users should expect from their overclock and if there
are graphics card/system expectations at all. For now, you can probably take
some solace in our findings below.
Update 6th October 2015
Acer have answered our questions about the
overclocked refresh rate. The reason for the "up to" 100Hz message is
because you can customise the maximum refresh rate you want to select in
the OSD, in 5Hz increments all the way up to 100Hz. We have been
told that overclocking does NOT affect the Acer warranty, which carries
standard warranty terms and is available via the Acer support website.
We are told that once enabled in the OSD the
monitor will report back to your operating system the supported refresh
rates and it should not matter what graphics card vendor you are using.
Based on this you should be able to get 100Hz in most cases it seems. If
you can't quite get the full 100Hz but are very close (like 95Hz for
example) we would not worry about that - just enjoy the screen!
|
Once you enable the overclocking feature you can
choose then the max refresh rate which you want to be available in Windows, from
75Hz in steps of 5 up to 100Hz maximum. You then just have to use the "apply and
reboot" option which restarts the monitor.

Above: Windows
refresh rate settings at default, and then once overclocking has been enabled in
the OSD menu
Once it has restarted, you will see additional
refresh rate settings available in Windows to choose from. You simply just
select the setting you want and that's it!

The active resolution and refresh rate are
confirmed in the information section of the OSD menu as well.
We had no issues with running at any of these
refresh rates from our tests system, using an NVIDIA GTX 750 graphics card. All
of them worked fine in Windows with no visible artefacts or flickering. Some
users have reported some coil whine from the screen when using overclocked
refresh rates on the X34 but we heard nothing different at any refresh rate.
There is a very feint electric whistle from the screen if you listen really
closely to it (we mean very close!) but that is there even at 60Hz so it's
nothing to do with the refresh rate overclocking. If you have a really obvious
whine from the screen which is an issue for you, we would suggest contacting
Acer for an RMA as that doesn't seem to be an issue affecting every sample.
Certainly ours was fine.
Most importantly, we tested
the screen using the
BlurBusters.com frame skipping test and were very pleased to see that no
frames were dropped at all, even at the maximum 100Hz refresh rate. This
overclocking seemed to work very well, at least from our test system and we were
impressed. We expected that using an AMD graphics card might be different (an
AMD Club 3D Radeon R9 290 series) but we were very pleasantly surprised to see
that the results were the same on that system. No frames were dropped even at
the maximum 100Hz, and we had no issues at all overclocking the screen to
various refresh rates all the way up to the maximum.
60Hz Refresh
Rate

100Hz Refresh
Rate

On another interesting note, we found that the
response times were improved when running at a higher refresh rate. We've seen
this form some other screens as well where response times are somewhat
influenced by the active refresh rate. Here, we saw a decent improvement in
response times when you compare them at 60Hz and at 100Hz. In both cases we were
using the optimal OD normal setting by the way. Pixel transitions improved down
to 7.5ms G2G with the 100Hz refresh rate, and the small amount of overshoot we
saw before was also eliminated. A pleasing result, and some decent response
times from an IPS-type panel. With an average G2G of 7.5ms, it is suitably low
enough to support the 100 fps frame rate available here, since the screen needs
to refresh every 10ms. When response times are slower than the refresh
frequency a lot of blurring is introduced, but that's not a problem here on the
Predator X34. The
G-sync operating range is 30
- 100Hz maximum, depending on if you've used the overclocking feature which
gives you a nice wide range. Given the high resolution here, the G-sync support
combined with a wide dynamic range should provide a very pleasing gaming
experience. We ran
some G-sync tests which looked smooth and performed well.

More Detailed Measurements
OD Normal, 100Hz Refresh Rate
Having established that the OD normal setting
offered the best response/overshoot balance we carried out our normal wider
range of measurements as shown below. We used the maximum overclocked refresh
rate of 100Hz since that had been stable on our test system and delivered the
optimal response time performance.
 

The average G2G response time was more accurately
measured at 7.9ms which was very good overall for an IPS-type panel.
Transitions were a little slower on rise times (changes from dark to light) but
not by anything significant. One transition (0-100) seemed to be a little slower
than everything else, measured at 15ms, where the overdrive impulse was perhaps
not quite as well tuned. Overall the response times were faster
than the best 60Hz IPS panels available at the moment, which can reach down to
about 8.6ms G2G average without overshoot. Here, the 100Hz overclocked refresh
rate helped push them a little lower which was pleasing.

There was no overshoot at all on any
transition as long as you were using the maximum refresh rate. Having tested OD
normal at 60Hz there was some very minor overshoot detected, but nothing you
should notice in normal use anyway.

Display Comparisons


The above comparison table and graph shows you the
lowest, average and highest G2G response time measurement for each screen we
have tested with our oscilloscope system. There is also a colour coded mark next
to each screen in the table to indicate the RTC overshoot error, as the response
time figure alone doesn't tell the whole story.
When using the screen at the native 60Hz refresh
rate the response times (9.0ms G2G) were only a little slower than some of the
best 60Hz IPS-type panels available, which can reach down to ~8.6ms G2G while
remaining free of overshoot. When you push the refresh rate up to 100Hz (which
was reliable from our NVIDIA and AMD systems without frame dropping) the
response time are improved nicely, down to 7.9ms G2G which is impressive. There
is also no overshoot at all at this refresh rate as long as you stick to the
'normal' OD mode. This left the screen as being slightly faster than the XR341CK
which could reach 8.7ms G2G at its maximum 75Hz refresh rate. It was also quite
a bit faster than the other 34" widescreen displays we've tested like the Dell
U3415W (10.6ms G2G) and LG 34UM95 (9.5ms G2G). Very pleasing performance really
when it comes to pixel response times.
The screen was also tested using the chase test in
PixPerAn for the following display comparisons. As a reminder, a series of
pictures are taken on the highest shutter speed and compared, with the best case
example shown on the left, and worst case example on the right. This should only
be used as a rough guide to comparative responsiveness but is handy for a
comparison between different screens and technologies as well as a means to
compare those screens we tested before the introduction of our oscilloscope
method.

34"
4ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS @ 100Hz (OD = Normal)
In practice the Acer Predator X34 performed best with
OD at normal. There were low levels of blurring evident, the image looked sharp
and there was no overshoot at all. The support for higher refresh rates up to
100Hz provided additional levels of motion clarity and image smoothness which
surpassed what was possible from 60Hz panels. The additional G-sync support for
NVIDIA users will also be of real benefit.

34"
4ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS @ 100Hz (OD = Normal)

34"
4ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS @ 75Hz (OD = Normal)

34"
8ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS (Response Time = Normal)

34"
5ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS (Response Time = Middle)
The above images show a comparison with the
Acer XR341CK model (FreeSync version) along with the other two
other 34" ultra-wide screens we've tested. The X34 with its faster response
times and higher refresh rate was a bit better than the XR341CK version with a
less noticeable blurring. The
Dell U3415W featured the exact
same panel as the Acer screens but was a little slower than both in practice we felt. Our
oscilloscope measurements also confirmed slower response times on the Dell, and
some low levels of overshoot which the Acer did not have. The LG was pretty
similar to them both as well although slightly slower again than the Acer. The
X34 definitely has the edge here, largely thanks to its overclocked 100Hz
refresh rate.

34"
4ms
G2G LG.Display AH-IPS @ 100Hz (OD = Normal)

27"
4ms G2G AU Optronics AHVA (IPS-type)
@ 144Hz (OD = Normal)

27"
1ms
G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (OD = Normal)

27"
1ms
G2G AU Optronics TN Film @ 144Hz (AMA = High)

23.5" 4ms G2G
Sharp MVA + 120Hz
We've also included a comparison above against
some other very fast 120Hz+ compatible screens we have tested. The screens shown
here are all aimed primarily at gamers and have various features and extras
which make them more suitable overall for gaming. Firstly there is a comparison
against the excellent
Acer XB270HU with very fast response times (5.5ms G2G, no overshoot), native
144Hz refresh rate and also NVIDIA G-sync and Ultra Low Motion Blur (ULMB)
support. It's currently our bench-mark for IPS panel gaming - well, actually our
current favourite gaming screen of any type! It has the edge over the X34 when
it comes to refresh rate support and image smoothness, also thanks to the fact
it is a native 144Hz support and with no need to overclock the screen (which may
or may not be reliable on other systems with the X34).
Then there's the very popular
Asus ROG Swift PG278Q with its 144Hz refresh rate and fast response time TN
Film panel. This showed very fast pixel response times (2.9ms G2G), with
moderate levels of overshoot, but smooth movement thanks to its increased
refresh rate. You are able to reduce the motion blur even more through the use
of the ULMB strobed backlight as well if you need to and again this model also
supports NVIDIA's G-sync technology.
Then there is a comparison against the
BenQ XL2730Z with another very fast TN Film panel and 144Hz refresh rate.
This showed very low levels of motion blur (3.4ms G2G), but some dark overshoot
was introduced as a side-effect as you can see. This screen also includes a
native Blur Reduction mode to help eliminate further perceived motion blur and
works well, along with AMD FreeSync support.
Lastly there is the MVA based Eizo FG2421 screen
with a fast response time (especially for the panel technology being used) and
120Hz refresh rate support. There is also an additional 'Turbo 240' motion blur
reduction mode which really helps reduce the perceived motion blur in practice.

Pursuit Camera Tests
We've already tested above the actual
pixel
response times and other aspects of the screen's gaming performance. We
wanted to carry out some pursuit camera tests as well to give an even more
complete idea of the performance of this screen, particularly when using the
overclocked 100Hz refresh rate.
Pursuit cameras are used to capture motion blur as
a user might experience it on a display. They are simply cameras which follow
the on-screen motion and are extremely accurate at measuring motion blur,
ghosting and overdrive artefacts of moving images. Since they simulate the eye
tracking motion of moving eyes, they can be useful in giving an idea of how a
moving image appears to the end user. It is the blurring caused by eye
tracking on continuously-displayed refreshes (sample-and-hold) that we are keen
to analyse with this new approach. This is not pixel persistence caused by
response times; but a different cause of display motion blur which cannot be
captured using static camera tests. Low response times do have a positive impact
on motion blur, and higher refresh rates also help reduce blurring to a degree.
It does not matter how low response times are, or how high refresh rates are,
you will still see motion blur from LCD displays under normal operation to some
extent and that is what this section is designed to measure. Further
technologies specifically designed to reduce perceived motion blur are required
to eliminate the blur seen on these type of sample-and-hold displays which we
will also look at.
We used the
Blurbusters.com Ghosting Motion Test which is designed to be used with
pursuit camera setups. The pursuit camera method is
explained at BlurBusters
as well as
covered in this research paper. We
carried out the tests at various refresh rates.
These UFO objects were moving horizontally at 960 pixels per second, at a frame
rate matching refresh rate of the monitor.

OD
Setting Normal
These tests capture the kind of blurring you would
see with the naked eye when tracking moving objects across the screen. As you
increase the refresh rate the perceived blurring is reduced, as refresh rate has
a direct impact on motion blur.
It is not
eliminated entirely due to the nature of the sample-and-hold LCD display and the
tracking of your eyes.
No matter how fast the refresh rate and pixel
response times are, you cannot eliminate the perceived motion blur without other
methods.
Unfortunately there is no Blur
Reduction (ULMB) mode available from this screen so you are not able to reduce
perceived motion blur further using a strobe backlight.

~
Note: optimal
overdrive settings used on each screen
We can also compare the pursuit camera tests at
60Hz and 100Hz compared with a couple of very fast and very popular gaming
screens above. The X34 performs very well in these tests and you can see the
benefits on blurring by using the higher refresh rates. So not only are you
getting improvements in frame rate, fluidity and response times - you're getting
reductions in perceived motion blur. It should be noted that the
Acer XB270HU and
Asus ROG Swift PG278Q can both push past 100Hz and up to 144Hz refresh rate,
helping to eliminate the blurring even more. Their added blur reducing ULMB
modes really help improve image clarity on moving images when used as well.
Check the reviews linked for both those screens for further information on that.

Additional Gaming Features

-
Aspect Ratio Control -
The X34 has 2 options listed in the menu for
aspect ratio control through the OSD 'setting' section menu. There are options for aspect
and 1:1 pixel mapping. However, these didn't seem to work when we tested them.
If you run at anything other than the native resolution, the aspect ratio is
maintained. e.g. a 1920 x 1080 resolution has black borders on the sides.
However, the 1:1 pixel mapping didn't seem to do anything, the image always just
filled as much of the screen as possible. With the aspect ratio at least being
maintained it was not a problem though as that's the main thing.

Lag
We have written an in depth article about
input lag and the various measurement techniques which are used to evaluate
this aspect of a display. It's important to first of all understand the
different methods available and also what this lag means to you as an end-user.
Input Lag vs. Display Lag vs. Signal
Processing
To avoid confusion with different terminology we
will refer to this section of our reviews as just "lag" from now on, as there
are a few different aspects to consider, and different interpretations of the
term "input lag". We will consider the following points here as much as
possible. The overall "display lag" is the first, that being the delay between
the image being shown on the TFT display and that being shown on a CRT. This is
what many people will know as input lag and originally was the measure made to
explain why the image is a little behind when using a CRT. The older stopwatch
based methods were the common way to measure this in the past, but through
advanced studies have been shown to be quite inaccurate. As a result, more
advanced tools like SMTT provide a method to measure that delay between a TFT
and CRT while removing the inaccuracies of older stopwatch methods.
In reality that lag / delay is caused by a
combination of two things - the signal processing delay caused by the TFT
electronics / scaler, and the response time of the pixels themselves. Most
"input lag" measurements over the years have always been based on the overall
display lag (signal processing + response time) and indeed the SMTT tool is
based on this visual difference between a CRT and TFT and so measures the
overall display lag. In practice the signal processing is the element which
gives the feel of lag to the user, and the response time of course can
impact blurring, and overall image quality in moving scenes. As people become
more aware of lag as a possible issue, we are of course keen to try and
understand the split between the two as much as possible to give a complete
picture.
The signal processing element within that is quite
hard to identify without extremely high end equipment and very complicated
methods. In fact the studies by Thomas Thiemann which really kicked this whole
thing off were based on equipment worth >100,1000 Euro, requiring extremely high
bandwidths and very complicated methods to trigger the correct behaviour and
accurately measure the signal processing on its own. Other techniques which are
being used since are not conducted by Thomas (he is a freelance writer) or based
on this equipment or technique, and may also be subject to other errors or
inaccuracies based on our conversations with him since. It's very hard as a
result to produce a technique which will measure just the signal processing on
its own unfortunately. Many measurement techniques are also not explained and so
it is important to try and get a picture from various sources if possible to
make an informed judgement about a display overall.
For our tests we will continue to use the SMTT
tool to measure the overall "display lag". From there we can use our
oscilloscope system to measure the response time across a wide range of grey to
grey (G2G) transitions as recorded in our
response time
tests. Since SMTT will not include the full response time within its
measurements, after speaking with Thomas further about the situation we will
subtract half of the average G2G response time from the total display lag. This should allow us to give a good estimation of
how much of the overall lag is attributable to the signal processing element on
its own.
Lag Classification
To help in this section we will also introduce a broader classification system
for these results to help categorise each screen as one of the following levels:
-
Class 1)
Less than 16ms / 1 frame lag at 60Hz - should be fine for gamers, even at high levels
-
Class
2)
A lag of 16 -
32ms / One to two frames of lag at 60Hz - moderate lag but should be fine for many gamers.
Caution advised for serious gaming and FPS
-
Class
3)
A lag of more
than 32ms / more than 2 frames of lag at 60Hz - Some noticeable lag in daily usage, not
suitable for high end gaming

For the full reviews of the models compared here and the dates they were written
(and when screens were approximately released to the market), please see our
full
reviews index.
(Measurements in ms) |
|
Total Display Lag (SMTT
2) |
9.20 |
Pixel Response Time
Element |
3.95 |
Estimated Signal
Processing Lag |
5.25 |
Lag Classification |
1 |
|

Class 1 |
We have provided a comparison above against other
models we have tested to give an indication between screens. The screens
tested are split into two measurements which are
based on our overall display lag tests (using SMTT) and half the average G2G
response time, as measured by the oscilloscope. The response time is split from
the overall display lag and shown on the graph as the green bar. From there, the
signal processing (red bar) can be provided as a good estimation.
The screen showed a total lag of only 9.2ms.
Approximately 3.95ms of that can be accounted for by pixel response times,
leaving an estimated signal processing lag of only 5.25ms. This is basically
nothing and means the screen should be fine for all levels of gaming. Other
G-sync screens to date have shown similar very low levels of lag which is
pleasing.

Movies and Video

The following summarises the screens performance
in video applications:
-
34"
screen size makes it a good option for an all-in-one multimedia screen, and
pushing towards the diagonal size of a lot of smaller end LCD TV's even.
-
21:9
aspect ratio is well suited to videos and particularly movies, leaving smaller
borders on DVD's and wide screen content at the top and bottom. The ultra-wide
aspect and size is well-suited to watching movies and really works well.
-
3440 x
1440 resolution can support full 1080 HD resolution content.
-
Digital interfaces support HDCP for any encrypted and protected content
-
HDMI and DisplayPort connections available.
Nice to see HDMI connectivity included for modern DVD players, Blu-ray,
consoles etc thanks to the use of G-sync v II here.
-
Cables provided in the box
for HDMI and DisplayPort.
-
Light
AG coating provides clear images with no major graininess, and without the
unwanted reflections of a glossy solution.
-
Wide
brightness range adjustment possible from the display, including high maximum
luminance of 294
cd/m2 and a good minimum luminance of
13 cd/m2. This should afford you very good control for
different lighting conditions. Contrast ratio remains stable across most of
that adjustment range as well and is excellent for an IPS-type panel at
>1000:1. Brightness regulation is controlled without the need for PWM and so
is flicker free at all settings which is pleasing.
-
Black
depth and contrast ratio are very good for an IPS-type panel at 1033:1 after
calibration. Detail in darker scenes should not be lost as a result.
-
There
is a specific 'movie' eColor preset mode available for movies or video in the
OSD which is basically just preset brightness level. You might be better
setting up the screen to your liking and saving it then as one of the 3 user
defined game modes.
-
Very
good pixel responsiveness which can handle fast moving scenes in movies
without issue. No overshoot issues which is good news as well. Just stick to
the 'Normal' OD setting for optimum performance.
-
100Hz
refresh rate improves fluidity of moving images and reduces perceived blurring
to a degree.
-
Wide viewing angles from IPS panel technology
meaning several people could view the screen at once comfortable and from a
whole host of different angles. White IPS glow from an angle may be an issue
for some darker content.
-
Some
slight areas of backlight leakage but nothing major on our sample which is
good. Some uniformity variations may be visible on darker movie scenes in
darkened room conditions.
-
Pretty good range range of ergonomic adjustments
available from the stand, making it fairly easy to position the screen in
different ways for viewing from different positions. They were stiff to move
and the screen is heavy, so you won't want to move it around too often. The
lack of side to side swivel was a bit of a shame though.
-
Integrated 2x 7W DTS sound stereo speakers offered on this model, may be ok for the odd
video clip but probably not for any movie viewing.
-
There
are options for hardware aspect ratio control, but they don't seem to function
properly from our testing. They do at least maintain the source aspect ratio
which is the main thing, so that should work fine for external devices which
commonly operate in 16:9 format.
-
Picture By Picture (PbP) and Picture In Picture (PiP) are not available on
this model, unlike the XR341CK.

Conclusion
We know how excited people were to get a
detailed review of this monitor as quickly as possible, so we decided to release
this as a full review straight away. We
worked overtime to bring you this quickly as well so if you appreciate the early
access to the review and enjoy reading and like our work, we would welcome a
donation
to the site to help us continue to make quality and detailed reviews for you.
We were impressed by the Acer Predator X34 overall
and thought it was a very good gaming screen. The main area of interest is
obviously the overclocked 100Hz refresh rate. We know some people are up in arms
about how this has been advertised, and the whole "at the users risk" statement
in the OSD menu. At the end of the day we really doubt this will have any affect
on user warranty (we are confirming with Acer) and if it works reliably, there
doesn't need to be an issue. We suspect it's a case of Acer covering themselves
given the native refresh rate support of the panel, and in case it doesn't quite
reach 100Hz on every system. We were pleased to find it reached 100Hz reliably
on both our NVIDIA and AMD systems, without frame dropping and without any
observed side-effects. The boosted refresh rate lead to improved response times,
which were very good for an IPS-type panel and without any overshoot evident as
well. The refresh rate boost brought about improvements in image fluidity, frame
rates and perceived motion blur and provides a really good range in which the
added G-sync function can operate. The addition of G-sync is obviously really
attractive to NVIDIA users and adaptive refresh rates are big plus of any screen
now for gaming. The screen also benefited from very low lag making it a very
strong option for gaming, especially considering the popular ultra-wide format
and high resolution used here.
Default setup was good and the contract ratio was
strong for an IPS panel. The use of a flicker free backlight and light AG
coating is always positive as well. We liked the design of this X34 model and
felt it looked a bit better than the XR341CK. The stand is somewhat limited and
quite stiff to move but it looks pretty sleek still. We were also pleased that
the latest G-sync module allowed Acer to provide an additional HDMI input. It's
still more limited than FreeSync screens, but it's an improvement over the
previously limited single DisplayPort connection.
There were a couple of areas of concern /
disappointment. Firstly the banding issue on blue colour gradients was a clear
problem with the initial firmware when we first tested the screen and something
Acer had to address before stock was widely available. It is now fixed and
confirmed working in our tests. See
our relevant
section of this review for up to date information on the new firmware and
any affected regional stock. That was really the only problem with the screen as
we found no issues with reported coil whine or artefacts/problems at high
refresh rate. Our unit showed pretty good panel uniformity and no major
backlight bleed. You do need to be prepared for the characteristic IPS glow,
which should not be confused with backlight problems as we've discussed. We were
a little disappointed ULMB is not included but that probably needs to be saved
for native high refresh rate panels above 100Hz.
This really is a very good gaming screen. If
you're after an ultra-wide with high resolution, G-sync support and a nice
boosted 100Hz refresh rate this is definitely worth checking out.
Pros |
Cons |
Good response times for IPS
and very low lag |
Stand a little limited in
design and function |
G-sync support for excellent
gaming performance |
IPS glow may be a problem on a
screen this size and shape |
Overclocked refresh rate works
reliably up to 100Hz, offering a lot of benefits |
Missing an ULMB blur reduction
mode |
Check Pricing and Buy - Direct Links
|
Amazon USA |
Amazon UK |
Overclockers UK |
Amazon GER |
Amazon CAN
|
TFTCentral is a participant
in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Programme, an affiliate
advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn
advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk,
Amazon.de, Amazon.ca and other Amazon stores worldwide. We also
participate in a similar scheme for Overclockers.co.uk. |

|
TFT Central Awards Explained
We have two award
classifications as part of our reviews. There's the top 'Recommended'
award, where a monitor is excellent and highly recommended by us. There is
also an 'Approved' award for a very good screen which may not be perfect,
but is still a very good display. These awards won't be given out every
time, but look out for the logo at the bottom of the conclusion. A list of
monitors which have won our awards is available
here. |
|