Dell launches new 27" QHD 360Hz and 32" 4K 240Hz QD-OLED Alienware gaming monitors

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,292   +43
Staff
Something to look forward to: Dell appears keen to maintain its pole position in the OLED gaming monitor race. The company's envelope-pushing AW3423DWF will soon receive two follow-ups with higher refresh rates and the same or better resolution. Dell plans to release the high-end monitors in January but hasn't revealed exact specs and pricing.

Dell unveiled two upcoming Alienware QD-OLED monitors at TwitchCon this week. Like the company's top-ranked AW3423DWF, the curved panels will combine high resolutions with bleeding-edge refresh rates when they ship in early January.

The AW3423DW was the first OLED to reach 175Hz at 34 inches with Samsung's latest QD-OLED panels when Dell launched it last spring. Later that year, the company significantly lowered the offering's price with the AW3423DWF by dropping G-Sync (while maintaining FreeSync) and is now presenting high-end players with a new choice between pixels and frames.

Between the two upcoming models, the larger AW3225QF seems positioned to replace last year's product. Although slightly smaller at 32 inches, it raises the resolution from 1440p to 4K and the refresh rate to 240Hz. Furthermore, like the AW3423DWF, it features a curved screen.

Meanwhile, users who don't mind sticking to 1440p or want more frames will have the 360Hz AQ2725DF. The 27-inch flat-panel screen presents an ideal alternative for competitive esports players.

Dell hasn't revealed details like pricing, available ports, response time, curvature, or color and HDR performance, but plans to soon. Wccftech expects more information to come during CES 2024, which seems likely given the early January release date. The outlet leaked a Dell product slide confirming that the two products include a three-year burn-in warranty.

High-resolution QD-OLED monitors aren't the only Alienware displays recently pushing limits. In March, the company's AW2524H became the first 500Hz monitor to hit the market. Asus is preparing a 540Hz competitor but hasn't revealed a price or release date.

Both ultra-high-performance screens are limited to 1080p, and Dell used an IPS display while Asus opted for a TN panel. However, topping 500fps in any title, even at 1080p, will tax any GPU currently on the market.

Hitting that performance profile in Counter-Strike 2 requires the almighty GeForce RTX 4090, though the flagship card managed that framerate at 1440p in Overwatch 2. These and similar titles will likely benefit the most from the upcoming AW3225QF and AQ2725DF.

Permalink to story.

 
WtaF, curving a 32" 4K screen is the ultimate in stupidity. It's not even needed on the 34" 21:9 screens, let alone a standard 16:9 screen. Epic failure Dell.
 
4K 240hz, like there is a GPU that can drive that screen. :)
In desktop fine but no 2023 game can reach more than 100 fps even with the 7900XTX or the RTX4090.
Who buy this for CS2 or older games?
 
I happen to like the 1900R curve on my 34" 21:9 screen.

A curved 34" screen is a very different experience to a 16:9 32" screen.

The former is complimentary to the experience, the latter is a total annoyance and has stopped any interest I had one, stone cold dead.
 
In desktop fine but no 2023 game can reach more than 100 fps even with the 7900XTX or the RTX4090.
What games are you thinking of?
What I can say, BG3 easily sits 150-200fps at 4K completely maxed out on a 4090.

I guess the new UE5 games don’t reach 100fps or at least, not at ultra settings anyway.
 
4K 240hz, like there is a GPU that can drive that screen. :)
In desktop fine but no 2023 game can reach more than 100 fps even with the 7900XTX or the RTX4090.
Who buy this for CS2 or older games?
rtx 5090 super could allow comfortable 4k 144hz, the amazing might be just around the corner
 
What games are you thinking of?
What I can say, BG3 easily sits 150-200fps at 4K completely maxed out on a 4090.

I guess the new UE5 games don’t reach 100fps or at least, not at ultra settings anyway.
Looking at the original review from last year not even older games the "mighty" 4090 cant drive 240 fps. Just 3-4 games made it to 240.


average-fps-3840-2160.png


BG3 is the exception to the 2023 lauched games.
 
Looking at the original review from last year not even older games the "mighty" 4090 cant drive 240 fps. Just 3-4 games made it to 240.


average-fps-3840-2160.png


BG3 is the exception to the 2023 lauched games.
Aren't all of those running without DLSS enabled though? I get what you're saying now, even the most powerful GPU in the world can't "natively" push 4k at over 200fps

If anything, to me that would just be a benefit of the screen, means it'll take many years before I even see the screen at its full potential, it'll last many MANY years in my eyes.
 
Aren't all of those running without DLSS enabled though? I get what you're saying now, even the most powerful GPU in the world can't "natively" push 4k at over 200fps

If anything, to me that would just be a benefit of the screen, means it'll take many years before I even see the screen at its full potential, it'll last many MANY years in my eyes.
Same as like getting the first FHD TV and waiting for cable operators to catch-up during the days.
From "futureproofing" POW it can be a nice investment.

P.S. DLSS is not my thing, I can't stand it for FHD or QHD and never had a 4K display to test or a GPU for 4K.
 
rtx 5090 super could allow comfortable 4k 144hz, the amazing might be just around the corner
I don't think a 5090 will be released until the last quarter in 2024 or in 2025. There is little reason for NVIDIA to update their gaming cards while they are making so much money from AI cards.
 
A curved 34" screen is a very different experience to a 16:9 32" screen.

The former is complimentary to the experience, the latter is a total annoyance and has stopped any interest I had one, stone cold dead.
I agree I would never go 16:9 curved only works for me on ultrawide.
 
Aren't all of those running without DLSS enabled though? I get what you're saying now, even the most powerful GPU in the world can't "natively" push 4k at over 200fps

If anything, to me that would just be a benefit of the screen, means it'll take many years before I even see the screen at its full potential, it'll last many MANY years in my eyes.
Don't think I didn't catch that pun you made at the end you little scamp. Now say you're sorry for engaging in such awful humor.
 
WtaF, curving a 32" 4K screen is the ultimate in stupidity. It's not even needed on the 34" 21:9 screens, let alone a standard 16:9 screen. Epic failure Dell.
Samsung is OBSESSED with curves. They tried years to make it happen on their Galaxy S series flagships only to finally abandon the idea. Likewise it has not taken off in the monitor space.
4K 240hz, like there is a GPU that can drive that screen. :)
In desktop fine but no 2023 game can reach more than 100 fps even with the 7900XTX or the RTX4090.
Who buy this for CS2 or older games?
There are plenty of older games that still look great and play very well in 4K. CS2 hardcore players will go for 500Hz regardless.
 
A curved 34" screen is a very different experience to a 16:9 32" screen.

The former is complimentary to the experience, the latter is a total annoyance and has stopped any interest I had one, stone cold dead.

How close do you sit to the monitor to need a curve for 34". Might want to back up for the health of your eyes.
 
How close do you sit to the monitor to need a curve for 34". Might want to back up for the health of your eyes.
My face is about arm's length from my 34" and its fine.

There are also different curve's something that is 1500R is an aggressive curve.

1800R/1900R is a lot more mild.
 
Is the article saying that even the 27" is curved? I hope not. That seems pointless.

Also, do we need 300+ refresh rate monitors?
 
Cool monitors, but the refresh rate epeen contest is a waste of fricken time! I hate when marketing makes engineers go for the MOAR BIGGER approach to specs and spends all this time for little to no improvement on the product. 2x hz =/= 2x improvement.
 
100%. Who needs 300+Hz?

Also, GettCouped. Am I reading the article correctly? Did they really add a curve to the 27" version?
If they did, I think I'd find that very bizarre for that size.

Thanks

Cool monitors, but the refresh rate epeen contest is a waste of fricken time! I hate when marketing makes engineers go for the MOAR BIGGER approach to specs and spends all this time for little to no improvement on the product. 2x hz =/= 2x improvement.
 
I looked through the vod of the stream and the 27" is NOT curved. My only concern for my place is possible reflections. They all are very glossy. I know that makes the OLED pop even more, but the possibility of light reflecting off of it is a concern. It's also not easy to know if it will or not when you don't already have a glossy monitor to use as a test.
 
I agree I would never go 16:9 curved only works for me on ultrawide.

I am not sure what aspect ratio has to do with it, it's do to with width of the display and/or amount of curvature that matters.

If you had 2 or 3 of 32" displays next to each other I can see that a gentle curve would be beneficial, although it would be fine without it too. But an extreme curve doesn't make much sense, I agree.
 
Back