This was posted 7 years 6 months 12 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Acer 35" 144hz Curved VA Freesync Monitor Model XZ350CU (21:9 2560x1080) - $1169 @ PLE

70
Acer 35" 144hz Curved VA Freesync Monitor Model XZ350CU (21:9 2560x1080) - $1169 @ PLE
Go to Deal
Cashback
randomchecker on 15/10/2016 - 15:17 ple.com.au (200 clicks)
Last edited 17/10/2016 - 11:20 by 2 other users

Main Specifications

Technical Information

Screen Size 35"

Screen Mode UW-UXGA
Response Time 4 ms
Aspect Ratio 21:9
Backlight Technology LED
Panel Technology
Vertical Alignment (VA)
Tilt Angle -5°to25°
Video Maximum Resolution 2560 x 1080
Color Supported 16.7 Million Colors
Contrast Ratio 100,000,000:1
Brightness 300 Nit
Tearing Prevention Technology FreeSync
Audio Speakers Yes
Interfaces/Ports HDMI Yes

Although at this price, to me I'd personally take:
Acer Predator XB321HK 32" G-SYNC 4K 4MS IPS LED Gaming Monitor $1299

Computing 35inch Acer Computer Peripheral LCD Monitor Monitor UW-UXGA Gaming Freesync

Related Stores

PLE Computers
PLE Computers

closed Comments

  • Noire on 15/10/2016 - 15:27
    +18

    I would had gone for a higher resolution monitor if i was spending more than 1k for a monitor

    • kml22 on 15/10/2016 - 15:33
      +5

      True, expensive for this type of specs. I would avoid this monitor.

    • l005e on 15/10/2016 - 15:58

      I don't think you can get 144Hz at higher resolution atm.

    • deadpoet on 15/10/2016 - 16:09

      Yup. 79.39 PPI makes for absurdly large pixels. Not a good look.

    • c0balt on 15/10/2016 - 17:46
      +3

      Why on earth did you upvote it then??

  • michaelTito on 15/10/2016 - 15:35
    +3

    1080p…..

  • urzu on 15/10/2016 - 16:23
    +1

    I use an LG 34" 1080p, not curved for gaming mainly. It looks fantastic. I don't stick my face to the screen obviously, but I don't notice the pixels. Considering the substantial grunt you would need to push 4K and 144fps, I'd say sticking with 1080p is reasonable.

  • ChadHominem on 15/10/2016 - 16:29
    +2

    "Contrast Ratio 100,000,000:1"

    LOL

    • Lukian on 17/10/2016 - 11:21

      Well if you're scaling vs IPS manufacturer's bogusly large claims, that's probably accurate! :P

      I have the gsync model of this, it's contrast is impressively higher than my Dell U2412M's.

  • leznix on 15/10/2016 - 16:41

    I am after a freesync gaming monitor at the moment and is considering this model.
    How is this compare to Acer XR341ck freesync?

    • JF on 15/10/2016 - 17:00
      +1

      Lower res, 3440x1440 vs 2560x1080 which makes this one easier to drive but at 35" I think you really need the higher pixel density for a nice sharp image.
      Higher freq, 144hz vs 75hz for the XR341ck. Anything with 3440x1440 would be very hard to drive at over 100hz though for a lot of games.
      Lower quality screen, VA vs IPS. The IPS should give considerably better color accuracy and a better looking image.

      Personally I'm waiting for the X34P to come out as I run Nvidia cards, but I think the 75-100hz frequency range is enough for me and I wouldn't go back to a 1080p screen after running a 1600 vertical res 30" monitor. I think 1440 is again a good height especially in this aspect ratio.

      • leznix on 15/10/2016 - 17:13

        I am using Rx 480 at the moment with the intention to upgrade to 490.

        That is why I am holding off buying a new monitor even though I desperately needs a 2nd monitor right now.

  • jiberz on 15/10/2016 - 17:37

    If you don't care about 1080p. Wouldn't AOC 31.5" 144hz free sync for 450 be a much better deal.

    • [Deactivated] on 15/10/2016 - 18:45

      I think the 21:9 aspect ratio matters for some.

      I've read good things about the AOC. But some people might be wanting the extra width.

      Still, that's over $600 for extra width…

      • jiberz on 15/10/2016 - 19:49
        +1

        2 people I know got the aoc. They are happy with it. I personally think desktop looks a bit fuzzy though. You could always buy 2 AOCs for super duper wide and still have change left over.

        • ChadHominem on 15/10/2016 - 23:10

          Bezel in the middle =/

  • danchoi on 15/10/2016 - 23:57
    +3

    ohhh damnn… 144MegaHertz? Knew I should've waited before dropping monies on a 165hz display :D

    • ItsMeAgro on 17/10/2016 - 09:51

      Totally didn't even see that until you pointed it out…

      • Lukian on 17/10/2016 - 11:22

        Fixed now

  • motion2082 on 22/10/2016 - 23:09

    Vertical Alignment (VA) does not have good viewing angles and has a slow response time. Colours should be ok. Resolution is not good. Images will be blury and not sharp..honestly I think early adopters will be disappointed. If you asked me to value this panel I would say $600 max

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join