AOC Q3279VWF 31.5" 1440p 75Hz MVA 5ms gtg Freesync Monitor (Pre Order) £249.99 @ CCL
255°

AOC Q3279VWF 31.5" 1440p 75Hz MVA 5ms gtg Freesync Monitor (Pre Order) £249.99 @ CCL

31
Edited by:"Putterill"Found 19th Nov
This monitor is starting to appear for pre order, CCL is £20 cheaper than Amazon amazon.co.uk/dp/…PQ/ and £50 cheaper than Overclockers overclockers.co.uk/aoc…tml.

There will probably be similar or better monitor deals during Black Friday but preordering one of these might be a good plan B in case there isn't. I've ordered one from Amazon as they have a pre order price guarantee and I'm assuming they will price match

The monitor is already on sale in some markets in the southern hemisphere, so I presume will be released here within a week or two when stock arrives.

(Edit £241.19 here uk.insight.com/en-…001 thanks Dalkirst for the info)

Product page eu.aoc.com/en/…vwf

Top comments

Original Poster

tipsy19732 m ago

5ms is no good for fps games. I wish they could lower the ms on these


It's fine for those of us who don't have the reaction times of a 14 year old overloaded on Red Bull ;-)

tipsy19731 h, 3 m ago

5ms is no good for fps games. I wish they could lower the ms on these


Yawn, 5ms and even higher is absolutely fine for any type of game. When LCDs were new for PCs anything under 20ms was considered suitable for gaming, perhaps that was optimistic but I'd still happily game on anything 16ms and under. Hate this whole elitism surrounding PC gaming where as soon as any new piece of hardware, format or standard appears everyone 'has' to have it and anything even slightly lower just won't do.

Like in another thread I saw someone saying that 60HZ was 'terrible' for gaming and you 'need' 144HZ! FFS 60 fps has been the golden standard for years, console games still struggle to keep constant 30fps. For many 60 fps is still a luxury and console games have shown that even the lowly 30 fps can work well with good frame timing.

Really wish people would place more emphasis on getting a good well balanced PC for the money available instead of arguing the case for every new expensive, and probably unnecessary for most people, piece of hardware....
31 Comments

I have the AG322QCX 144hz AMVA version, very happy with it. £450ish, good quality and performance for the price.

I'm in two minds about this. Would like a larger monitor, but not sure if hanging out for a lower price 4k option worth it? Probably not in all reality, but for a measure of future proofing, it's still a consideration for me. Good for the price though.

Original Poster

gabesdad9 m ago

I'm in two minds about this. Would like a larger monitor, but not sure if …I'm in two minds about this. Would like a larger monitor, but not sure if hanging out for a lower price 4k option worth it? Probably not in all reality, but for a measure of future proofing, it's still a consideration for me. Good for the price though.


I've been debating whether to go 4k or not too.

I decided on 1440p because a: I don't like using windows scaling (doesn't play nicely with some of the software I use) which I would have to do with 4k, and b: my RX 580 doesn't really have the power to push 4k.

I'm working on a Mac, and 4k for me would be more the future proofing point of view, and potential for use with Final Cut Pro X, etc.

Original Poster

gabesdad8 m ago

I'm working on a Mac, and 4k for me would be more the future proofing …I'm working on a Mac, and 4k for me would be more the future proofing point of view, and potential for use with Final Cut Pro X, etc.


4k is probably the better bet for you if there's a chance you are going to be editing 4k footage in the future, I'm hoping that if I need to do it in a couple of years then prices will have dropped far enough for me to justify getting a second monitor.

5ms is no good for fps games. I wish they could lower the ms on these

Original Poster

tipsy19732 m ago

5ms is no good for fps games. I wish they could lower the ms on these


It's fine for those of us who don't have the reaction times of a 14 year old overloaded on Red Bull ;-)

Putterill52 m ago

It's fine for those of us who don't have the reaction times of a 14 year …It's fine for those of us who don't have the reaction times of a 14 year old overloaded on Red Bull ;-)

And pizza....

Original Poster

Dalkirst1 m ago

https://www.uk.insight.com/en-gb/productinfo/monitors-and-displays/0007478141-00000001


Excellent, even cheaper at £241 :-)

tipsy19731 h, 3 m ago

5ms is no good for fps games. I wish they could lower the ms on these


Yawn, 5ms and even higher is absolutely fine for any type of game. When LCDs were new for PCs anything under 20ms was considered suitable for gaming, perhaps that was optimistic but I'd still happily game on anything 16ms and under. Hate this whole elitism surrounding PC gaming where as soon as any new piece of hardware, format or standard appears everyone 'has' to have it and anything even slightly lower just won't do.

Like in another thread I saw someone saying that 60HZ was 'terrible' for gaming and you 'need' 144HZ! FFS 60 fps has been the golden standard for years, console games still struggle to keep constant 30fps. For many 60 fps is still a luxury and console games have shown that even the lowly 30 fps can work well with good frame timing.

Really wish people would place more emphasis on getting a good well balanced PC for the money available instead of arguing the case for every new expensive, and probably unnecessary for most people, piece of hardware....

Original Poster

ST31239 m ago

Yawn, 5ms and even higher is absolutely fine for any type of game. When …Yawn, 5ms and even higher is absolutely fine for any type of game. When LCDs were new for PCs anything under 20ms was considered suitable for gaming, perhaps that was optimistic but I'd still happily game on anything 16ms and under. Hate this whole elitism surrounding PC gaming where as soon as any new piece of hardware, format or standard appears everyone 'has' to have it and anything even slightly lower just won't do. Like in another thread I saw someone saying that 60HZ was 'terrible' for gaming and you 'need' 144HZ! FFS 60 fps has been the golden standard for years, console games still struggle to keep constant 30fps. For many 60 fps is still a luxury and console games have shown that even the lowly 30 fps can work well with good frame timing. Really wish people would place more emphasis on getting a good well balanced PC for the money available instead of arguing the case for every new expensive, and probably unnecessary for most people, piece of hardware....


Couldn't agree more, judging by some of the comments I see it's not worth attempting to enjoy a game unless it's at 4k 144hz with 1ms response time, wide gamut with no colour shift and an infinite contrast ratio. And don't forget the top end keyboard and mouse that are of course needed to be able to play at all :-)

Both spec sheets say 60 Hz. Good to see monitors are still coming down in price though.

Original Poster

ttttd54 m ago

Both spec sheets say 60 Hz. Good to see monitors are still coming down in …Both spec sheets say 60 Hz. Good to see monitors are still coming down in price though.



I'm pretty sure it's 75hz, I've been following the news on this monitor for a few weeks and I've seen it referenced as that (here for example techreport.com/new…ing). It may have been a mistake on some of the launch coverage or more likely it's just the way they list it in the specs - my current monitor is 60hz default and on the spec sheet but had 75hz available in the adapter properties out of the box.
Edited by: "Putterill" 19th Nov

Putterill4 h, 52 m ago

Couldn't agree more, judging by some of the comments I see it's not worth …Couldn't agree more, judging by some of the comments I see it's not worth attempting to enjoy a game unless it's at 4k 144hz with 1ms response time, wide gamut with no colour shift and an infinite contrast ratio. And don't forget the top end keyboard and mouse that are of course needed to be able to play at all :-)


bare in mind PC users will likely have incredibly powerful CPU's and GPU's, tons of fast ram and a box full off SSD's
Mating all that to a 1980's TV isnt ideal

I dont think its all elitism, its just wanting to marry up the best set of components. Which lets face it, is part of the reason of owning a PC.
(being honest i have no idea if 5ms makes a difference lol!)

Original Poster

r200ti31 m ago

bare in mind PC users will likely have incredibly powerful CPU's and …bare in mind PC users will likely have incredibly powerful CPU's and GPU's, tons of fast ram and a box full off SSD'sMating all that to a 1980's TV isnt ideal I dont think its all elitism, its just wanting to marry up the best set of components. Which lets face it, is part of the reason of owning a PC. (being honest i have no idea if 5ms makes a difference lol!)


I've got a ryzen 1600 with an rx 580 so I'm a junior of the PC master race, but it gets silly when people claim you "need" high end stuff to play. I've also got a q6600 here with a HD 7850 which is ancient but I can still enjoy playing on, I'm struggling to get a constant 30 fps sometimes on it but it's far from unplayable.

This and quite a few monitors other similar monitors don't have a VESA mount. Annoying as this would have been perfect otherwise. Anything else close in price that is similar?
Edited by: "whatsthematter" 19th Nov

5ms is 200Hz...
16ms is 60Hz

whatsthematter2 h, 21 m ago

This and quite a few monitors other similar monitors don't have a VESA …This and quite a few monitors other similar monitors don't have a VESA mount. Annoying as this would have been perfect otherwise. Anything else close in price that is similar?

Not really a gaming monitor although response time isn't bad for an IPS but the viewsonic 4k 32" that was on the site recently is really good. I got one for non gaming use and the colours and build quality are excellent and it's got a VESA mount which was a must for me too. It's slightly cheaper than this too!

I have an Iiyama 120hz TN panel 27" monitor, had it now for 4 years and I'm happy with it. Yes you do also notice the difference between 60hz and 120hz and from 1ms to 5ms response. My previous monitor was a 60hz AMVA 24" with a 6ms response time, now when I went to the 120hz with the lower response I noticed the difference. Everyone is different when it comes to quality of the screen, resolution and so on.

Original Poster

tipsy19731 h, 35 m ago

I have an Iiyama 120hz TN panel 27" monitor, had it now for 4 years and …I have an Iiyama 120hz TN panel 27" monitor, had it now for 4 years and I'm happy with it. Yes you do also notice the difference between 60hz and 120hz and from 1ms to 5ms response. My previous monitor was a 60hz AMVA 24" with a 6ms response time, now when I went to the 120hz with the lower response I noticed the difference. Everyone is different when it comes to quality of the screen, resolution and so on.


There's no doubt that the higher the hz and the faster the response the better the experience, but it's people saying you can't play on a monitor because it's not 144hz or 1ms that bug me. It's nice to have a Ferrari, but for most people a Ford will do everything they need.

This will be £200 from ocuk on black Friday

Putterill12 h, 21 m ago

There's no doubt that the higher the hz and the faster the response the …There's no doubt that the higher the hz and the faster the response the better the experience, but it's people saying you can't play on a monitor because it's not 144hz or 1ms that bug me. It's nice to have a Ferrari, but for most people a Ford will do everything they need.



I honestly do see your point, my AMVA monitor had crisp clear colours and despite the higher response it was great. I spoilt it when I got the 1ms monitor, 60fps for a console is different to a pc gaming though and that will never be overcome. I had a dell 21" trinitron crt that had a 100hz loved that but it was 15k in weight and ate electric, gone are them days.

This is £199.99 on Overclockers for today (possibly all black friday week).

overclockers.co.uk/aoc…tml
Edited by: "awastedyouth" 20th Nov

Original Poster

Amazon are now at £199 as well :-)

Putterill19th Nov

There's no doubt that the higher the hz and the faster the response the …There's no doubt that the higher the hz and the faster the response the better the experience, but it's people saying you can't play on a monitor because it's not 144hz or 1ms that bug me. It's nice to have a Ferrari, but for most people a Ford will do everything they need.



The thing is, it's not like saying a Ferrari is better. It's like saying a v6 has more horsepower than a v4 and just 'feels' better.

We aren't talking about premium money for premium's sake, There are affordable 120-144hz monitors.

Original Poster

Nate14921 h, 19 m ago

The thing is, it's not like saying a Ferrari is better. It's like saying a …The thing is, it's not like saying a Ferrari is better. It's like saying a v6 has more horsepower than a v4 and just 'feels' better.We aren't talking about premium money for premium's sake, There are affordable 120-144hz monitors.


High FPS monitors need top end GPUs unless you are only playing esports, it's well out of the reach of most gamers. Yes it's a better experience but it's not ESSENTIAL which all the "5ms/60fps is no good for gaming" comments on almost any monitor deal posted would have you beleive.

Putterill2 h, 13 m ago

High FPS monitors need top end GPUs unless you are only playing esports, …High FPS monitors need top end GPUs unless you are only playing esports, it's well out of the reach of most gamers. Yes it's a better experience but it's not ESSENTIAL which all the "5ms/60fps is no good for gaming" comments on almost any monitor deal posted would have you beleive.



There are plenty of games that support high refresh rates.

You are confusing 'max graphics, max FPS' with 'High FPS'.

CS:GO, DOOM, and others fit that bill.

But who said it was essential in this thread? You are changing the narrative from 'Ferrari v Ford' to 'Essential'.

I think none of those really capture the real nature of the difference.

If you play games that benefit from high FPS, such as shooters, racers, or any fast turning/moving game... Then you'll see a big difference.

If you play games like Civ, League, Dota, or other top down slower games, 60fps is perfectly ok.

But again, if you haven't tried 120/144hz and you are just assuming things, maybe you should give it a serious try, you may see the massive difference and understand what many people see, or you won't notice, as a lot of others don't see.

I can notice the difference on my monitor, my wife can't.

Original Poster

Sigh. Look, try to understand, yes it's nice to have nice toys and play a game at it's full potential, but for people to say rubbish like "5ms is no good for fps games" IN THIS THREAD (check the top comment) is nonsense.

I am perfectly aware of the balance between quality and frame rate, it's rather insulting that you seem to think I didn't. The difference between us is you seem to be in the camp that thinks high frame rates are worth sacrificing any semblance of visual quality for, while I like many people would prefer to have a more balanced approach.

I'm not saying you are wrong, you just have a different preference which is fine, but don't tell me I'm confused and if I only experienced the promised land I'd be a convert. Here's the news - I have experienced it and decided it wasn't worth the loss of quality or the expense of a 1080ti.

£199.99 on Amazon
Edited by moderator: "trimmed link" 22nd Nov

CCL have now price-matched Amazon at 199.00 (yes, Amazon dropped another 99p), but stock won't be in until 20th Dec. Supposedly, Overclockers UK will get the first stock batch ahead of anyone else, which I find a bit surprising myself.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text