Thursday, July 9th 2015

BenQ Announces XR3501 Curved Cinematic-Widescreen Monitor for Gaming

BenQ announced the XR3501, a 35-inch curved, cinematic-widescreen monitor, which it recommends for motorsport gaming. The monitor packs a curved 21:9 aspect-ratio panel, with 2560 x 1080 pixels resolution, 144 Hz refresh-rate, 4 ms response time (GTG), 300 cd/m² maximum brightness, and 2000:1 static contrast ratio. It offers 178°/178° viewing angles. Its racy looking chrome stand suspends the monitor over a hinge, letting you tilt it vertically by 15°. Inputs include DisplayPort 1.2, mini-DisplayPort, two HDMI 1.4, and an analog audio input. Other features include 3 game mode display setting presets. The XR3501 will be generally available some time in August, 2015.
Add your own comment

22 Comments on BenQ Announces XR3501 Curved Cinematic-Widescreen Monitor for Gaming

#1
The Quim Reaper
Was kind of interested...until I got to the 1080 vertical resolution bit.


..meh.
Posted on Reply
#2
nickbaldwin86
3440x1440 and I would be in

Waiting for ASUS to release a 34" 3440x1440 144hz 21:9 G-Sync
Posted on Reply
#3
Vlada011
nickbaldwin86, post: 3312525, member: 99503"
3440x1440 and I would be in

Waiting for ASUS to release a 34" 3440x1440 144hz 21:9 G-Sync
Me to, ROG 3800R. But I have nothing against 60fps. Better 60fps with MSAA x4 than 120fps MSAA Disabled.
But I'm glad that other manufacturers start with Curved Screen.
This is now nice improvements compared with flat screen.
ASUS will mostly offer 3440x1440p resolution... That's little harder for hardware than 2560x1440p but not as 4K.
Or people could play on 2560x1080p.
Posted on Reply
#4
Cybrnook2002
I am going to be all over this one. Been waiting for a while.

Can't wait for 144 FPS + VSR/DSR. And I can read the text :-)
Posted on Reply
#5
GhostRyder
I would like this if they had variations with Gsync/Freesync. It really is needed especially at the 144hz and with naming itself a "gaming monitor". Personally I like the idea and I love this monitor but wish it had just a bit more.
Posted on Reply
#6
Cybrnook2002
GhostRyder, post: 3312571, member: 149328"
I would like this if they had variations with Gsync/Freesync. It really is needed especially at the 144hz and with naming itself a "gaming monitor". Personally I like the idea and I love this monitor but wish it had just a bit more.
Only thing I want to add, (and the reason I have fought to park my car into either the green or red camp) is if I am aiming for 144+ FPS, why even bother with g-sync or Freesync? My goal is not sub 100 FPS.... So, I, personally, like not being tied to either side and in keeping my monitor camp agnostic, I am free to run AMD or Nvidia cards :-)
Posted on Reply
#7
GhostRyder
Cybrnook2002, post: 3312573, member: 44647"
Only thing I want to add, (and the reason I have fought to park my car into either the green or red camp) is if I am aiming for 144+ FPS, why even bother with g-sync or Freesync? My goal is not sub 100 FPS.... So, I, personally, like not being tied to either side and in keeping my monitor camp agnostic, I am free to run AMD or Nvidia cards :)
True, but running at that high range is pretty hard even down to a mere 1080p resolution mostly because games are just not optimized for that range. The power required even with something crazy sometimes still causes some skipping around which is noticeable on a high level in those ranges (At least to me). But I agree on the whole "Not being tied down to one side argument" as that is a problem with both these techs (Albeit the Freesync cost is not much). Plus with the Ultra wide its going to require a bit more GPU power as it is.

Its hard to choose a monitor in this day and age ain't it?
Posted on Reply
#8
Cybrnook2002
GhostRyder, post: 3312577, member: 149328"
True, but running at that high range is pretty hard even down to a mere 1080p resolution mostly because games are just not optimized for that range. The power required even with something crazy sometimes still causes some skipping around which is noticeable on a high level in those ranges (At least to me). But I agree on the whole "Not being tied down to one side argument" as that is a problem with both these techs (Albeit the Freesync cost is not much). Plus with the Ultra wide its going to require a bit more GPU power as it is.

Its hard to choose a monitor in this day and age ain't it?
Sure is
Posted on Reply
#9
jhatfie
Seems interesting if used just for gaming even with the 2560x1080 resolution. I have a 27" 1080p IPS monitor (with a similar ppi I imagine) that my son uses and games actually look real good on it, even though it is borderline for other uses due to the sad ppi. However I just saw this bad boy is $1000 for pre-order at NewEgg. Yowza......................about 30-40% to expensive for that resolution
Posted on Reply
#10
flynnski
Vlada011, post: 3312537, member: 110294"
Me to, ROG 3800R. But I have nothing against 60fps. Better 60fps with MSAA x4 than 120fps MSAA Disabled.
But I'm glad that other manufacturers start with Curved Screen.
This is now nice improvements compared with flat screen.
ASUS will mostly offer 3440x1440p resolution... That's little harder for hardware than 2560x1440p but not as 4K.
Or people could play on 2560x1080p.
You're going to be waiting a long time then (2+ years). In order to get to 144Hz you are going to NEED Display Port 1.3.


Display Port 1.2 = HBR2 = 17.28Gb/s, Display Port 1.3 = HBR3 25.92Gb/s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort
Forward link channel with 1 to 4 lanes; effective data rate 1.296 (reduced bit rate), 2.16 (high bit rate), 4.32 (HBR2), or 6.48 Gbit/s (HBR3) per lane (total 5.184, 8.64, 17.28, or 25.92 Gbit/s for a 4-lane link)



Maths:
3440 x 1440 = 4,953,600 pixels / frame
4,953,600 x 144 (FPS/Hz) = 713,318,400 pixels per sec
---using 8/10bit encoding per channel x 3 channels, ie 30 bits sent per 24

713,318,400 x 10 (bits) x 3 (channels) = 21399552000 = 21.40Gb/s
at 10bit color would be well over 25.6Gb/s, nearly capping DisplayPort 1.3 !!!
Posted on Reply
#11
n3m3515com
Cybrnook2002, post: 3312573, member: 44647"
Only thing I want to add, (and the reason I have fought to park my car into either the green or red camp) is if I am aiming for 144+ FPS, why even bother with g-sync or Freesync? My goal is not sub 100 FPS.... So, I, personally, like not being tied to either side and in keeping my monitor camp agnostic, I am free to run AMD or Nvidia cards :)
Keep in mind that Freesync is not proprietary, it is just part of the new DisplayPort VESA 1.2 (Adaptive Sync) implementation standard. Whether you buy a monitor with Freesync or Gsync it doesn’t dictate what hardware you use with it. Of course, paying extra for Gsync hardware in a monitor isn’t the ideal way to go when you are going to run AMD graphics cards. And yes, Freesync monitors cost a little more but that is probably more related to paying extra for the new technology just the same as when they implement HDMI 1.3 to 1.4 VESA changes. Eventually it just becomes the norm.
Posted on Reply
#12
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Vlada011, post: 3312537, member: 110294"
Me to, ROG 3800R. But I have nothing against 60fps. Better 60fps with MSAA x4 than 120fps MSAA Disabled.
But I'm glad that other manufacturers start with Curved Screen.
This is now nice improvements compared with flat screen.
ASUS will mostly offer 3440x1440p resolution... That's little harder for hardware than 2560x1440p but not as 4K.
Or people could play on 2560x1080p.
I don't think current DisplayPort has enough bandwidth for 3440x1440@144Hz. You probably have to plug in two DP connections and cope with the synchronization issues between the two halves of your screen.
Posted on Reply
#13
nickbaldwin86
Why do people say that... No duh!!! But they can put 1.3 on the monitor and boom
Posted on Reply
#14
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
nickbaldwin86, post: 3312685, member: 99503"
Why do people say that... No duh!!! But they can put 1.3 on the monitor and boom
And boom...nothing happens. No current GPU supports DP 1.3.

NVIDIA won't support DP1.3 until a new resolution that needs that bandwidth, takes mainstream, because DP1.3 would automatically enable AMD FreeSync (since 1.2a would become a subset).
Posted on Reply
#15
ShiBDiB
depending on the price, might snag one of these
Posted on Reply
#16
THE_EGG
There is a review already done by NCIX here;


Seems to be an AMVA panel with a 2000R curve (the most curved monitor available). This would be sooo good for racing setups imo, despite the relatively low resolution.
Posted on Reply
#17
antodelg
this monitor was announced in April...
Posted on Reply
#18
RejZoR
How about pairing DP cables to power a single massive monitor? Graphic cards already have bunch of outputs, you just have to provide a monitor that can accept signal from 2 DP cables simultanously and a graphic card driver that ouhtputs image through 2 cables. Then you can use similar techniques as for SLi/Crossfire. Each cable carries half of the screen signal. Or every other line of pixels. Or something like that...

This way you could double or triple the bandwidth of DP (for example my GTX 980 has 3x DP ports)...
Posted on Reply
#19
Prima.Vera
nickbaldwin86, post: 3312525, member: 99503"
3440x1440 and I would be in

Waiting for <vendor> to release a 35" curved 3440x1440 144hz 21:9 G-Sync
Hear, hear!
Posted on Reply
#21
sprsk
35-inch curved, with 2560 x 1080 ... you'll be able to count the pixels from 1 meter ... lol ...
pathetic ...
For Cinema and game ... OK , But do not try to read ... danger .. lol
Posted on Reply
#22
Caring1
sprsk, post: 3313751, member: 158609"
35-inch curved, with 2560 x 1080 ... you'll be able to count the pixels from 1 meter ... lol ...
Bit of an exaggeration :slap:
I've got a bigger Full H.D. TV that has a lower resolution, and I can't see pixels from a meter away.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment