This was posted 4 years 2 months 9 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

AstiVita 31.5" Curved Gaming VA Monitor - 2560x1440 Frameless 75Hz $279 Delivered @ AstiVita Amazon AU

1000
AstiVita 31.5" Curved Gaming VA Monitor - 2560x1440 Frameless 75Hz $279 Delivered @ AstiVita Amazon AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
bazinga8888 on 17/02/2020 - 11:41 amazon.com.au (4115 clicks)
Last edited 17/02/2020 - 16:09 by 4 other users
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Was looking for a cheap monitor after mine broke down, happen to see this cheap monitor on lightning deal. Pretty sure this monitor is posted here multiple times, can refer to those older post for details.
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/509027
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/508535

Mod Note Monitor is VA, not IPS.

Deal is fully claimed, but you can join the waitlist on the desktop site.

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Computing AstiVita Computer Peripheral LCD Monitor

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Astivita
Astivita

closed Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 17/02/2020 - 11:44

    I wanted something like this but UW for music production. Great price tho!

  • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 11:46
    -1

    for gaming, I'd say 75hz is on the low side if its a game requiring quick reaction times or very small quick moving details (e.g. FPS) - however for strategy/turn based games, and other productivity/entertainment the specs look really good.

    • AssociatedAstivita @ Astivita on 17/02/2020 - 12:07

      <3

      • Ashmattic on 21/02/2020 - 21:25

        Hi Astivita, I have two of the flat panel versions of these from you (H3201DP)
        One of them has suddenly stopped working. There are dark and light lines all over the screen and the screen is overall a green colour. There is also solid black vignetting around the outer inch of the screen. This appears whether or not a display cable is plugged in (except it will turn on and off if nothing's plugged in).
        While I feer this is a hardware issue, is there any chance this is a known bug and I can fix this myself without sending it back? The screen's failed me when I needed it most unfortunately.

        • AssociatedAstivita @ Astivita on 24/02/2020 - 09:48

          Apologies for this, please send us a message through Amazon or pm me your order ID and we will see what we can do to resolve this.

          Kind Regards,
          AstiVita

    • Jugganautx on 17/02/2020 - 12:29
      -3

      Good luck playing any AAA games over 75 fps without a 1080 atleast.

      • hikarikami on 17/02/2020 - 12:33
        +10

        My 5700XT runs plenty of games at 2k, well over 75 FPS.

        Having said that, I think it's nonsense that competitive games can't be played at 75hz or less. Professional gamers have been playing on 60hz and lower for decades.

        • tofuofdoom on 17/02/2020 - 12:43
          +2

          Is it still 75 fps average if you factor in time spent restarting because you forgot to turn off hardware acceleration on discord? :3

        • ethan961 on 17/02/2020 - 12:47
          +1

          They also used CRTs with refresh rates higher than 60Hz.
          Nobody's saying you can't play them at 75Hz or less, but completely ignoring skill, the experience is nicer and good equipment only gets more affordable. 144Hz isn't a huge leap in cost from this. It's just something to consider.

          Aside that, 75Hz alone is a noticeable improvement over 60Hz so it's definitely not a bad deal because of it for the right people.

        • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 13:02

          For certain games, FPS doesnt matter so 60-75 is fine. You'll find ALL competitive players in the FPS arena (PUBG/CS/OW) are actually using 240hz with some form of lightboost (giving them vastly superior 120hz with no ghosting). If your doing anything else but playing FPS competitively, this is a great screen.

          • Diji1 on 17/02/2020 - 15:03
            +1

            @Kill Joy:

            You'll find ALL competitive players in the FPS arena (PUBG/CS/OW) are actually using 240hz

            You didn't find that you just made it up..

            with some form of lightboost (giving them vastly superior 120hz with no ghosting). If your doing anything else but playing FPS competitively, this is a great screen.

            Most FPS players do not use Lightboost because it doesn't add much advantage in FPS unlike higher game fps.

            • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 15:44

              @Diji1:

              You'll find ALL competitive players in the FPS arena (PUBG/CS/OW) are actually using 240hz

              Sorry, a 'majority' - https://csgoresolutions.com/

              Most FPS players do not use Lightboost because it doesn't add much advantage in FPS unlike higher game fps.

              You're correct I was mis-informed.

              • itshammer on 17/02/2020 - 16:33
                +2

                @Kill Joy: Get off ozbargain you can't admit being wrong, double down

                Also good effort

        • Vinodra on 17/02/2020 - 13:56
          -1

          What are tou trying to proove with that statement? They said atleast a 1080, a 5700xt is on par with a 1080, you worded ypur statement like you are disagreeing with them, but you are just confirming their statement.

          • misu p on 17/02/2020 - 17:27

            @Vinodra: He was talking about 2k resolution, 1080p is 1k. His point is that you can play a lot of games with something less powerful. You can probably reach 75 FPS with a 580 in most esports games.

            • Vinodra on 17/02/2020 - 17:34

              @misu p: You do realise 1080 in this sense is referring to using a GTX 1080 to play games at 1440p right? When did I mention 1080p? I have a GTX 1080 and if I want to hit 75fps at 1440p is a lot of games I have to drop the settings.

              Being able to run certain games at 1080p/144fps on a card like the RX 580 is obviously possible, but extremly irrelevant to this post, as its for a 1440p monitor.

              • hikarikami on 17/02/2020 - 18:10

                @Vinodra: Yeah, looking at his original comment now I may have misread it, though I could have sworn it read differently when I replied. Either that or the original comment was edited…

      • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 12:58
        +1

        Can play overwatch at 144FPS on my 1070 laptop, which should be close to current gen mid range desktop cards in the $350 region (such as 1660).

        • Vinodra on 17/02/2020 - 13:53

          At what settings though? Overwatch is a pretty easy game to run but you must be dropping everything else to minimum to run the game at (2k/1440p)144fps.

          • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 14:02

            @Vinodra: 1080P mostly high except AA - not 1440P unfortunately since my screen is only FHD. But going of a friend with 2k/120hz with a 1070, he says hes only occassionaly noticed a drop below 100fps when 4+ ulti's are going off.

            Anyway, point being is over 75FPS is very achievable with mid range cards on most games.

            • Vinodra on 17/02/2020 - 17:44

              @Kill Joy: 100fps is not the same as 144fps.. i'd take a stable 60/75 over fps fluctationg between 100-144 any day.

              1070 is hardly a mid range card either. Mid range would refer to something more along the lines of a RX 580.

              Maybe I just dont get it, I have a 1440p/144hz monitor; and notice no difference between 60/75 or 144fps. Only benefit I actually get from having a 144hz screen is that I dont experiance screen tearing anymore.

              • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 18:24

                @Vinodra: At 75hz and the right settings you don't experience screen tearing either

              • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 18:50

                @Vinodra: You've moved very far away from the point but i'll humour you. If you wonna nit pick, it's your lucky day because i do that very well.

                100fps is not the same as 144fps

                Did I ever mention it was? MY setup can achieve 144fps at FHD - of course 100fps is not the same as 144hz, but we'll come back to this at the end for your contridiction.

                i'd take a stable 60/75 over fps fluctationg between 100-144 any day.

                He has a gsync monitor, which means that any FPS between 40-144 the screen can adjust it's refresh rate to match, whithout tearing. This is going to be much better since 95% of the time he enjoys 144hz, and the couple of seconds he dips, he still enjoys a sizeable improvement in FPS over someone using 60/75fps.

                1070 is hardly a mid range card either.

                Well as mentioned I have a gaming laptop with a 1070. Here is proof 1070 max Q (laptop version) is equivilent to a 1660 - gpu user benchmark

                I'll take an excert from PC gamer from this year (2020) to prove a 1660 is mid teir.

                We've updated a few of our top picks to reflect the launch of Nvidia's GTX 1660, 1650 Super and AMD's RX 5600 XT, RX 5500 XT. With these falling into the budget to mid-range tier, the high-end and extreme performance options have stayed mostly the same.

                Take particular notice of the wording - they actually place them BETWEEN budget and mid teir.

                I have a 1440p/144hz monitor; and notice no difference between 60/75 or 144fps

                Just because you cannot see it does not mean the difference doesnt exist. When it comes to competitive play, instincts come into play more so then reaction. You dont conciously identify a change in most cases, but you'll be able to start your reaction quicker to them because you saw the change earlier. It has been proven that air force pilots can identify a plane shape flashed for 1/220s of a second, thats 220fps. It goes further to say its probably possible to notice light at 300fps! Now obiously not everyone is capable of this, but its scientifically proven its possible to go way past 144hz and react to visual stimuli, so you're annectdote does not overrule in this case.

                Only benefit I actually get from having a 144hz screen is that I dont experiance screen tearing anymore.

                Thats probably because you've left your application framerate to exceed your monitor refresh rate. If you'd lock your application FPS to match your refresh rate (via vsync or similar), you'd experience no tearing at any FPS (as long as your FPS does not drop below your vsync value, in which case this is where gsync/freesync shine as i mentioned earlier). Bit funny the one positive you've attributed to 144hz is user error while running 60hz.

                i'd take a stable 60/75 over fps fluctationg between 100-144 any day.

                and…

                notice no difference between 60/75 or 144fps

                You've contradicted yourself. You cant prefer 60fps over 144-100fps but at the same time cant tell the difference between 60fps and 144fps on your monitor. I hope your actually going into your monitor's refresh rate in the advanced GPU settings and not just bumping up your application to 144FPS without adjusting your screens refresh rate(Hz) to match.

                Yes, my username checks out.

                • Vinodra on 17/02/2020 - 19:58

                  @Kill Joy: There is a difference between not being able to tell the difference (I guess a better phrase would be
                  tangible benefit) between 60/75/144 and being able to tell that the fps isnt stable. Of course I set the monitor to 144hz. Also, when I was using a 60hz monitor, I didnt leave the framerate unlocked, its just that alot of games implement vsync very badly, meaning a cap of 60hz will actually let the framerate go to 61, causing screen tearing. You're making alot of assumptions about me, treating me like im an idiot, its honestly quite insulting, you're not a "killjoy", you're just rude.

                  As someone who HAS a 2k monitor above 75hz, it is very rare that I can achieve fps above 75 in newer games at my desired settings, not everyone is playing easy to run esports titles such as Overwatch, CSGO etc.. Im done with this conversation.

                  • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 20:22
                    +1

                    @Vinodra:

                    tangible benefit between 60/75/144 and being able to tell that the fps isnt stable

                    They are essentially the same thing and I've shown why but i can explain further. that feeling you get when FPS isn't stable is because your actually noticing what your brain is ignoring - that you've got from a speed you view as normal (consistent), to something not normal very quickly. A better example is audio. Speech can be out of sync by 2 seconds and you'd not realize, because your brain subconciously adjusts everything for you. but if you quickly change the sync of the audio, your brain fumbles and doesn't know what to do. Same with lower FPS - your brain fills the gaps as fluid motion without you knowing it. It may 'look' the same as 144hz, but what your seeing between real frames is what your brain has guessed.When it gets more information in those gaps then its expecting (or less) it freaks, and thats how you can tell its 'unstable'.

                    Now for most people (likely all people), its not possible to react with regular thoughts to this because it happens on such a small scale you cannot process it, so people train reflexes to take advantage. Another example is a rally car drive is making many micro corrections a second he/she doesnt even understand conciously within a second to keep themselves on the track.

                    So the point i've already made around this previously with how people can react to 220fps and even percieve 300fps supports this; which is tangable benefit is very possible for the high percentile player who have trained reactions in their subconcious to take advantage of the increase in fps.

                    alot of games implement vsync very badly, meaning a cap of 60hz will actually let the framerate go to 61

                    If you actually have a $2k monitor, then you should have g-sync/free sync which i'd be 99% confident would resolve your issue. Do note that if your FPS is exceeding 144hz, you will have input lag, so often pro gamers will actually leave V/G/Free-sync off and enduring the tearing to ensure the lowest input lag. Your call on that one. But considering the following quote:

                    it is very rare that I can achieve fps above 75 in newer games at my desired settings

                    You wont be exceeding 144hz - so G/Free-sync actually would suit your use case well. Otherwise maybe you should get a new $2k computer to match your $2k monitor so you can use it properly at 144hz.

                    treating me like im an idiot

                    Well you said some silly & incorrect things so I had to guess how technically literate you are - maybe I assumed too low, maybe not.

                    its honestly quite insulting, you're not a "killjoy", you're just rude

                    Grow some skin. I at worst belittled you, and even then it was meant in jest. Lighten up.

          • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 18:26

            @Vinodra: An overclocked GTX 970 can run Overwatch high settings at 2K, 80~100 fps

  • Bargainlife on 17/02/2020 - 11:49

    good deal i bought my kogan 4k 27 inch curved 144hrz for $359 so you save some cash on this

    • Altitud on 17/02/2020 - 13:44

      And gain some size

      • Bargainlife on 17/02/2020 - 15:34

        yeah, the 31/32 wouldn't fit for me so i had to downgrade to 27inch

    • jasswolf on 17/02/2020 - 15:29

      2560x1440 144Hz, and that's probably the cap for this kind of monitor at the moment.

      You can regularly get such monitors now for $300-$330 on sale, including Samsung models. This 75Hz model is terrible value in comparison, especially once you understand that 31.5" 1440p has the same pixel density as 25" 1080p.

      Dunno how this deal got upvoted so much.

      • Bargainlife on 17/02/2020 - 15:36

        2560x1440 was the monitor i got, misspoke

        depends what you are using it for i guess not everyone is gaming

        • jasswolf on 17/02/2020 - 15:55

          I think these are pretty much the same panel, but the 144Hz is a slightly higher binning. Unsure how much tuning that these guys do, and whether that's worth the premium they're putting on a QHD panel.

  • Jettblack on 17/02/2020 - 11:59
    +19

    Legal Disclaimer: :
    PREMUM DEAD PIXEL POLICY: Replacement warranted when 2 or more bright sub pixels or 6 or more dark sub pixels are present within the first 18 months. ANY number of dead pixels within the first 30 days warrants a replacement. All other issues covered by our 3 year warranty.

    Pretty good 😀

  • CalmLemons on 17/02/2020 - 12:00

    hmmm this vs https://www.centrecom.com.au/viewsonic-ultra-slim-vx3276-2k-…

    Has anyone used this brand for a longer time?

    Not using this for gaming, just desktop use.

    • morebunnings on 17/02/2020 - 14:29

      I have 2 of these viewsonic ones. They are pretty good. I do software engineering and watch youtube on them.

      Almost identical to the flat version of this AstiVita monitor (which I had for 1 week but sent back because one was faulty, and Amazon wouldnt let me re-buy one at the special price, so I ordered these viewsonics instead). And by identical - the box, packaging, stand, buttons, bezel etc.. all felt exactly the same, just slightly different shape. Picture quality was identical.

      I'd probably go with this curved model, as viewing angles are slightly off because they are VA

    • bleach1st on 17/02/2020 - 20:48
      +1

      I have the ViewSonic model you've linked. I use it everyday and I love it but I am a programmer and do basic things on it. It's been great though and I love the resolution/size matchup at 2K.

  • Gracey on 17/02/2020 - 12:07
    +1

    Thinking of getting this as a "TV" to just run media via Chromecast Ultra. Does anyone know if the CC will support the native res? Also, im guessing it doesnt have a speaker at all but does it have aux out or anything so I can run a small portable speaker?

    • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 12:27
      +1

      No one really use computer screen built-in speaker these days…

      Hey I'll hook my Chromecast Ultra to this screen later today and will let you know how it goes. Currently it's connected to my TV

      • Gracey on 17/02/2020 - 12:32

        Yeah I figured as much but as long as it has aux out im good, could you confirm it does?

        • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 13:00

          Yes it has AUX output.
          I'm at work so I can't confirm on the Chromecast thing for you before the lightning deal runs out :x

          • Gracey on 17/02/2020 - 13:02

            @Scythic: Thanks. And thats fine, ill buy now ask questions later like a true ozbargainer. Can always cancel or return it if it doesn't do what I want :)

            • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 13:03

              @Gracey: I think you'll be pleased with the product

      • AustriaBargain on 17/02/2020 - 12:37

        You still want it to have built in speakers though. Built in speakers means it will have a headphone jack, so you can plug any speakers that take a 3.5mm input directly into it.

        • Gracey on 17/02/2020 - 12:48

          Just checked, one of the pics on the Amazon listing show it as having an audio out port that looks to be 3.5mm
          EDIT: I was looking at a different Astivita screen

        • Bigboomboom on 17/02/2020 - 13:41

          Not really, my Samsung monitor has 3.5mm jack but no speaker.

    • pcox on 17/02/2020 - 13:08

      Audio not listed on product description, only display ports.

      Can't you plug headphones or Bluetooth into your computer that you're casting from?

      I have an HDMI adapter for my old VGA monitor that has 3.5mm audio out. I think that the DRM restricts the resolution because it's analogue but maybe HDMI to DP (digital to digital) would work ok? I.e. plug the Chromecast into the display port input.

      Sorry, I don't have a Chromecast to verify.

      • Gracey on 17/02/2020 - 13:28

        @pcox Nah im running it standalone from the PC as media playback interferes with game performance. Just a chromecast which I control via phone

        • pcox on 17/02/2020 - 18:02

          Can the Chromecast support on the phone controlling the chromecast route audio through your phone's headphones?

          I hook up a Telstra TV to HDMI. Their app allows me to optionally play the audio back through the headphones on my Android phone instead of the telly.

  • patrioticpickle on 17/02/2020 - 12:15
    +8

    Please remove "IPS" from the title as it's a VA panel monitor.
    Got me all excited for nothing!

    Still a pretty good buy, I believe the samsung equivalent is $400+

    • jasswolf on 17/02/2020 - 15:32
      -2

      Nope. In fact, you can get 144Hz Samsung models for as low as $320 on sale.

      This is poor value in comparison.

  • bargaino on 17/02/2020 - 12:21
    +6

    AstiVita? Should go well with my wash basins Christmas novelties.

  • DrLobster on 17/02/2020 - 12:26

    Might be worth putting 'curved' in the title too

  • Haleaa on 17/02/2020 - 12:28

    I am looking for a 27" 144hz monitor around this price range, don't have to be 4k, any suggestion?

    • watto101 on 17/02/2020 - 12:30

      I'm looking for a 4k one with similar specs.. interested to see if anyone has front runners in those specs.
      Trying to keep it under about $500 for the monitor.

    • Kill Joy on 17/02/2020 - 12:59

      AOC 27g2 is good but slightly pricer at around $350.

      • fatbunn on 17/02/2020 - 22:17

        AOC 27g2 as per nov last year

        • Kill Joy on 18/02/2020 - 07:58

          Yes, but watto101 does not have a time machine, so I've given him accurate pricing for today which is the only price that is relevant.

  • O15 on 17/02/2020 - 12:29
    +3

    Talk about efficient titles, the resolution is only stated four times!

    • Lukian on 17/02/2020 - 12:58

      Fixed :)

  • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 12:30

    Bought this monitor from last deal. Absolutely bargain
    Would highly recommend for budget gaming monitor if you want a taste of gaming at 2K resolution. Make sure you have a good graphics card though

  • David Astonpp on 17/02/2020 - 12:33

    v7 77k

  • thebiggestfudge on 17/02/2020 - 12:42

    Would this be ok for PS4 gaming?

    • wingun on 17/02/2020 - 13:32

      I think this would be good for ps4 pro, might be able to take advantage of the higher res?

  • piston3461 on 17/02/2020 - 12:45
    +1

    too big for 1440p , 27 inch is a better size will be much sharper

    • Lukian on 17/02/2020 - 12:55

      Sit further away.

    • TrevorX on 17/02/2020 - 13:14
      +5

      Completely disagree, 32" @WQHD (2560x1440) is close to the same pixel pitch as 23" 1080p, or 43" 4K (3840x2160). This is bang on for everything running at 100% scaling (ie no scaling). If you go for 27" at WQHD text is too small at 100% scaling, so you have to go to 125% or 150%, and while some things look ok, there will always be issues with some elements looking blurry. Yes, things look 'sharper' when you increase pixel pitch (how many pixels you have per square cm or square inch), but unless you have an OS designed on a vector GUI renderer there will always be compromises running any type of scaling.

      Sure, if all you care about is gaming, you can go right ahead and cram 4K into a 27" or 24" screen with a 200MHz refresh rate and RTX2080 Ti and you'll have a pretty stellar experience, particularly if you sit less than a foot away from your screen, but outside of gaming you will have times when certain things will look like they stepped right out of 1998.

      If you sit a reasonable distance from your screen (like 1m, which is pretty standard) stick with 23-24" in FHD, 32" for WQHD (2K) or 43-45" in 4K, and you won't need scaling and everything will look much nicer.

      • piston3461 on 17/02/2020 - 14:06
        +2

        I have no issues reading text at 100% scaling at 1440p/27inch .
        Because the screen is smaller than 32 inch you can sit closer without fatigue and looking around the screen .

        • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 18:34

          I have no issues reading small text on a 1440p/32" monitor. The distance between the screen and my face is about 60 cm. I wear glasses
          Personally, I think 32" is the sweet spot for 1440p (2K)

      • [Deactivated] on 17/02/2020 - 15:02

        What's the best resolution for music production? Midi is pretty small, it's normally ok at 100%< would be ideal to maybe scale larger a little

        I was looking at 32-34" Ultra Wide and curved? But end of the day what's best for my eyes is ideal.

  • jackwilk on 17/02/2020 - 12:45

    Any good for watching sports in HD - is refresh rate good for fast moving object?

  • namgib on 17/02/2020 - 12:49

    Does anyone know what the dimensions are of the monitor? I have a smallish space which I can place it and it would suck massively if it didnt fit (that and my wife would be most unimpressed with more tech not doing what I justified).

  • FutureTech on 17/02/2020 - 12:51

    Is this good for side by side spreadsheets etc for office?

    • Lukian on 17/02/2020 - 12:56
      +1

      The curve usually makes that a bit weird, but less pronounced if you're split screening.

  • Phoebus on 17/02/2020 - 12:58

    This would make a good workstation monitor with high contrast VA.
    Though 75 Hz is pretty good for gaming I think I'd prefer IPS 75 Hz.

    • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 13:05

      I don't like IPS panel, the colour seems weird

      • TrevorX on 17/02/2020 - 13:50

        Hmm, well IPS is vastly superior in colour reproduction, contrast and viewing angle - pretty much every metric other than cost and refresh rate. If you care about seeing decent colour reproduction VA is not what you'd call a great choice. I would agree if you were comparing IPS to OLED, but certainly not compared to VA…

        • piston3461 on 17/02/2020 - 14:11
          +3

          VA is superior to IPS when it comes to contrast . Better for gaming but IPS is better for colour work.

  • cloudie9 on 17/02/2020 - 13:08

    I take it as no VESA mount?

    Edit: never, saw 75 x 75 VESA in the description.

  • tightm8 on 17/02/2020 - 13:11

    I have two of the non curve versions as my setup, couldn't be happier for the price.

  • Pub Envelope on 17/02/2020 - 13:22

    How would this be for running League of Legends/Witcher 3/Netflix ?

  • [Deactivated] on 17/02/2020 - 13:26

    Thanks Op, bought 50

    • cloudie9 on 17/02/2020 - 13:33
      +3

      What you need that many for? 50 x 2k = 100k pr0n?

    • deal seeking missile on 17/02/2020 - 13:59
      +1

      Upgrading the Office?

      • [Deactivated] on 17/02/2020 - 14:53

        https://matrix.fandom.com/wiki/The_Architect_(scene)?file=Neo_in_Arch_room.png

  • iampoor on 17/02/2020 - 14:21
    +4

    Bought first, deal with the wife later.

    Also don't know what I am going to do with it - but saw the deal at 96% claimed and FOMO took over.

  • SlimJimmy on 17/02/2020 - 14:40

    100% Claimed

    Just missed out..

    • [Deactivated] on 17/02/2020 - 14:49

      Is the waiting list option available?

      One just became available for me using this option, you have a short time to add to cart though.

      Edit: Problem getting through the checkout process, and price is $359.00 rather than the lightning deal of $279.00.

  • abctoz on 17/02/2020 - 14:58

    why buy this for gaming when you can spend a bit more for 144hz…

    • SlimJimmy on 17/02/2020 - 15:01
      +2

      Cheapest 31 inch 144hz 2K monitor that I can find is $459. Not exactly a 'bit more'.

  • moorey on 17/02/2020 - 15:20

    Pretty good price for a decent size and res for office use

    Got the AOC 32" 2K 75Hz last week for slightly more, wished I had waited just a bit!

  • wingun on 17/02/2020 - 15:41

    Decided to pull the trigger on this today. Hope be good.. 32” 2k 75hz sounds like ya can’t go wrong

    • SpaceGhost on 17/02/2020 - 19:21

      You wont be disappointed I got it on the last deal.
      Done a little gaming on it and it seemed pretty good. Descent color and I am happy with 75hz at this price.
      Just a PSA there are no speakers on this monitor.
      I have mine set up on a VESA mount the size and weight dont seem to be an issue.

  • JacobHarvey on 17/02/2020 - 16:42

    This is a good deal but I don't understand why it has been up-voted so much more than previous deals for the even cheaper (when on sale) AOC Q3279VWFD8 which is also an excellent 75Hz 1440p 32" monitor (it is also IPS if some people prefer that) in this price range. For example https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/501814 which only got 18 votes

    • Cataclysm on 17/02/2020 - 17:10

      Coz it's eBay plus? I would like to get either but too late

      • JacobHarvey on 17/02/2020 - 17:11

        Yeah true, by this stage everyone on the website has likely exhausted their free 1 month trial. Also if you need it now and have eBay plus active you can still get the AOC 32" IPS 75Hz one for $287.55 which is still a decent price for that monitor

    • Scythic on 17/02/2020 - 18:46

      I think it's because the previous deal for this monitor was underrated. It's a new product with no reviews from the seller. Many people didn't take risks. This deal has more upvotes today probably because people who bought the monitor from last deal and recognised it's a good bargain
      Also, I'm taking a break from eBay :P

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join