Alienware has good monitors, like Dell and thats about where it stands. ;) Sorry guys, i couldnt help myself. Anyway, that being said, their LG paneled monitors are very good, but i just wont do a Samsung monitor with all ive seen and experienced with them. Great SSD's, but TV's and Monitors by them are...... just not good. I hope for the customers sake that these monitors end up being good too since Alienware will be taking care of the guts and Samsung only supplying the panel, but if they get into that monitor any deeper than that panel id stay away.

lynx29you would surprised, if you look at the patch notes for LG C1 OLED last year... they improved so many things over time after listening to community feedback, reviewers, etc. HDR improved, dithering, etc.

Television ≠ Computer monitor.

VladiczechI'm waiting for new 34" OLED monitor for too long already, but based on specs I will skip this one.
Only HDR 400, curvature 1800R is too high, typical brightness 250cd/m2 is too low.

I keep my fingers crossed for true next gen OLED 34" or 38" monitor, 1000R curvature, at least 400cd/m2 typical brightness and G-SYNC Ultimate and then take my money :)

I'm using 1900R on my current ultrawide and its not an aggressive curve at all. however I agree 250cd/m2 does seem low for brightness.

I expect this monitor to be $1000+ just because its alienware.

Chrispy_Agreed. People forget that flat images suffer projection distortion and a curved image is actually less "wrong"

I prefer 32" and above to be curved displays. Even if you don't care about the curve it has a positive effect on viewing angles, leading to better colour and contrast uniformity on VA, as well as mitigating corner glow and fade out at the far edges on IPS displays.

Agreed anything over 32 is better with a curve for me.

All monitors by now should have hdmi 2.1 and displayport 2.0.

tomc100All monitors by now should have hdmi 2.1 and displayport 2.0.

Have you ever seen a dp 2.0 controller? Finalizing specs just doesn't mean having suitable hardware.

They need to start making 27"-21" oled screens,it seems there is only either big 32"+ or small portable oled screens.

tomc100All monitors by now should have hdmi 2.1 and displayport 2.0.

Except two things.
1. Nvidia's G-Sync Ultimate module doesn't support either.
2. There doesn't seem to be any DP 2.0 display drivers are yet, as in the physical chip that goes inside the display.
2½. DP 2.0 is said to require captive cables on the displays, but this might not be the case.

TheLostSwedeTelevision ≠ Computer monitor.

I understand what you are saying here, but I still disagree, because that line is very blurred when it comes to LG C1 and now the C2 series. They were designed knowing PC users would be using them heavily.

Also, some quality of life improvements to the algorithm for HDR and stuff is much welcome imo, and only comes with use over time and community feedback. I watch a youtuber guy named Teoh, he has a famous youtube channel reviewing TV's, and he has gone over in detail some of the LG OTA updates, honestly its really impressive stuff man, you really shouldn't just dismiss it as not being important based on historical context. I understand why you feel this way though, so its all good if you don't believe me, but I personally believe times have changed and LG has proven it and gained my trust, and also my wallet when the LG 42" C2 comes out.

lynx29I understand what you are saying here, but I still disagree, because that line is very blurred when it comes to LG C1 and now the C2 series. They were designed knowing PC users would be using them heavily.

Also, some quality of life improvements to the algorithm for HDR and stuff is much welcome imo, and only comes with use over time and community feedback. I watch a youtuber guy named Teoh, he has a famous youtube channel reviewing TV's, and he has gone over in detail some of the LG OTA updates, honestly its really impressive stuff man, you really shouldn't just dismiss it as not being important based on historical context. I understand why you feel this way though, so its all good if you don't believe me, but I personally believe times have changed and LG has proven it and gained my trust, and also my wallet when the LG 42" C2 comes out.

No, you're not. There are no smarts in a computer monitor. Your TV gets updates due to the smarts, as the manufacturer adds new features, adds/removes software, security updates to their not so secure OSes and so on. A monitor doesn't need this. Yes, it can be handy to be able to update the firmware via USB if the manufacturer finds a flaw in their firmware, it has happened, but since this isn't an option in most monitors, back to the manufacturer they go. OTA for a monitor is nonsense, it would just make them even more expensive.

TheLostSwedeNo, you're not. There are no smarts in a computer monitor. Your TV gets updates due to the smarts, as the manufacturer adds new features, adds/removes software, security updates to their not so secure OSes and so on. A monitor doesn't need this. Yes, it can be handy to be able to update the firmware via USB if the manufacturer finds a flaw in their firmware, it has happened, but since this isn't an option in most monitors, back to the manufacturer they go. OTA for a monitor is nonsense, it would just make them even more expensive.

We are going to have to agree to disagree then, my money is going to LG 42" C2 OLED, and I would bet money my gaming experience will be more immersive and graphically beautiful, and come in a cheaper cost than this this Alienware monitor does. Not to mention my LG will have a 3-5 year warranty, vs the 1 year that is standard to monitors.

Very Quantum Break-esque design. Not bad, not bad.

lynx29We are going to have to agree to disagree then, my money is going to LG 42" C2 OLED, and I would bet money my gaming experience will be more immersive and graphically beautiful, and come in a cheaper cost than this this Alienware monitor does. Not to mention my LG will have a 3-5 year warranty, vs the 1 year that is standard to monitors.

Is that gaming from a couch and not a computer desk?

MakaveliIs that gaming from a couch and not a computer desk?

I have a giant medieval sized computer desk from IKEA. 42" is about the perfect size for it. my 1080p 165hz 24" monitor I usually have to slide up half way from the back cause its too small for it lol

Size is relative ~ That's what she said ~

lynx29I understand what you are saying here, but I still disagree, because that line is very blurred when it comes to LG C1 and now the C2 series. They were designed knowing PC users would be using them heavily.

Also, some quality of life improvements to the algorithm for HDR and stuff is much welcome imo, and only comes with use over time and community feedback. I watch a youtuber guy named Teoh, he has a famous youtube channel reviewing TV's, and he has gone over in detail some of the LG OTA updates, honestly its really impressive stuff man, you really shouldn't just dismiss it as not being important based on historical context. I understand why you feel this way though, so its all good if you don't believe me, but I personally believe times have changed and LG has proven it and gained my trust, and also my wallet when the LG 42" C2 comes out.

There's just an issue: LG TV's are the only one getting OTA updates, I have an LG monitor, and I don't get that :D. So, it's a bit odd to present that as a feature giving them an advantage in the monitor market. There's just something weird happening right now where some "monitors" are getting as big as TVs, and TVs are getting feature that PC gamers want like VRR and 120hz+ refresh rate...

The issue that I might personally have with TV's is that they are made for entertainment first, and the specs don't list what color space are supported if its factory calibrated... things that you get when you buy a high end monitor. (Along with stuff like display port, usb HUB, Type C with PD for some...) and anything above 35" is way too big for my taste, and I don't see anyone making a High-end Oled TV below 45".

So yeah, it's an odd situation where the two markets merge at a certain point, but they quickly go their separate ways. (TVs get too big, and monitors too small)

dyonoctisThere's just an issue: LG TV's are the only one getting OTA updates, I have an LG monitor, and I don't get that :D. So, it's a bit odd to present that as a feature giving them an advantage in the monitor market. There's just something weird happening right now where some "monitors" are getting as big as TVs, and TVs are getting feature that PC gamers want like VRR and 120hz+ refresh rate...

The issue that I might personally have with TV's is that they are made for entertainment first, and the specs don't list what color space are supported if its factory calibrated... things that you get when you buy a high end monitor. (Along with stuff like display port, usb HUB, Type C with PD for some...) and anything above 35" is way too big for my taste, and I don't see anyone making a High-end Oled TV below 45".

So yeah, it's an odd situation where the two markets merge at a certain point, but they quickly go their separate ways. (TVs get too big, and monitors too small)

Monitors definitely have poorer support.

48" is definitely too big for a desk. But that being said now that I have it wall mounted and the desk pulled back from the wall 5 inches. I'm afraid to go back to 32" :/ the immersion in games is awesome and sitting back further from the monitor has actually made my headaches from too much staring/coding go away-- bit of an unexpected side effect.

Vayra86Somehow this stinks.

Vesa 400 True Black... 1000cd/m2 peak... 250cd/m2 static.

I'm not sure what trickery is deployed here, but I'm skeptical.

Why doesn't it conform to a much better HDR 'standard' (as laughable as those VESA ratings are) then? The 1000cd/m2 peak is pure marketing, it has no quantifiable use apparently for VESA. It can't conform to 'True Black' when producing higher peak brightness than 400cd/m2, could be another conclusion... which echoes my thoughts on how these QD-OLED panels work under the hood and why the contrast also isn't infinite like a true OLED.

The monitor industry advertises full screen white brightness. Say there is an LCD that has 250 cd/m² brightness when displaying white. When its displaying colors, the brightness will be a lot lower than 250 because LCD generates colors by blocking light. Red is generated by blocking blue and green and alllwing red to pass through. So a 250 cd/m² LCD screen when displaying full screen red can only display 83 cd/m².

OLED will stay a lot closer to 250 cd/m² in color scenes. Say you are displaying red on the screen. Green and blue sub pixels are powered off. The electric power which would have been used to power green and blue can be diverted to red subpixels, allowing you to get red brightness much greater than 83 cd/m². This is because while LCD displays colors by blocking light, OLED generates colors by having millions of tiny red, blue, green lights. So if some pixels are being less bright, that power can be diverted to other pixels. This is where 1000 cd/m² peak brightness comes in. If a scene in a movie has a small part of the scene as very bright... OLED can divert power to allow that bright part to reach 1000 cd/m².

The end result of all this is that when displaying actual scenes, a 250 cd/m² OLED is significantly brighter than a 250 cd/m² LCD.

And you are right this does stink because if someone hasn't studied how displays work, they will look at 250 cd/m² LCD and 250 cd/m² OLED and say they are the same. That is correct.. only when displaying full screen white. In an actual scene from a movie/game, the OLED will be significantly brighter. But the numbers don't convey that at all.

Here is an example of what I am talking about in terms of brightness. Left is LG C1 OLED. Right is Sony X85J LCD.





OLED gets brighter as you move away from a 100% white scene to 50% white scene. But it makes no difference to LCD. In a real scene, the OLED is a lot brighter (628 cd/m²) than what its 125 cd/m² would suggest.

The DisplayHDR 400 True Black certification requires:
- Sustained 10% window be >= 400 cd/m²
- Sustained 100% window be >= 250 cd/m²

The LG C1 meets the 10% window target (725 cd/m²) but fails to meet the 100% window target (125 cd/m²) and thus isn't certified. The Alienware can do 250 cd/m² at sustained 100% window and 450 cd/m² at 10% sustained window. The 1000 cd/m² is for 2% window. From the specifications, it looks like it will be good only for completely dark room HDR.

MEHH.. I'l just buy this year the new LG C2 OLED TV.. I don't see why spend MORE money on a monitor that feels like aging tech..

dyonoctisThere's just an issue: LG TV's are the only one getting OTA updates, I have an LG monitor, and I don't get that :D. So, it's a bit odd to present that as a feature giving them an advantage in the monitor market. There's just something weird happening right now where some "monitors" are getting as big as TVs, and TVs are getting feature that PC gamers want like VRR and 120hz+ refresh rate...

The issue that I might personally have with TV's is that they are made for entertainment first, and the specs don't list what color space are supported if its factory calibrated... things that you get when you buy a high end monitor. (Along with stuff like display port, usb HUB, Type C with PD for some...) and anything above 35" is way too big for my taste, and I don't see anyone making a High-end Oled TV below 45".

So yeah, it's an odd situation where the two markets merge at a certain point, but they quickly go their separate ways. (TVs get too big, and monitors too small)

Calibration is not an issue,


Teoh will have me covered with a step by step calibration for when the LG C2 comes out. I have had factory calibrated monitors in the past and honestly thought they were overrated.

Regardless, OLED is the future monitor or tv, whatever is your preference... so we will all be having a lot of fun very soon.

I am really hoping LG can make this 42" model come in at $899. if so i will be buying it day 1.

phanbueyMonitors definitely have poorer support.

48" is definitely too big for a desk. But that being said now that I have it wall mounted and the desk pulled back from the wall 5 inches. I'm afraid to go back to 32" :/ the immersion in games is awesome and sitting back further from the monitor has actually made my headaches from too much staring/coding go away-- bit of an unexpected side effect.

I hope the 42" does this for my headaches as well.

blanarahulThe monitor industry advertises full screen white brightness. Say there is an LCD that has 250 cd/m² brightness when displaying white. When its displaying colors, the brightness will be a lot lower than 250 because LCD generates colors by blocking light. Red is generated by blocking blue and green and alllwing red to pass through. So a 250 cd/m² LCD screen when displaying full screen red can only display 83 cd/m².

OLED will stay a lot closer to 250 cd/m² in color scenes. Say you are displaying red on the screen. Green and blue sub pixels are powered off. The electric power which would have been used to power green and blue can be diverted to red subpixels, allowing you to get red brightness much greater than 83 cd/m². This is because while LCD displays colors by blocking light, OLED generates colors by having millions of tiny red, blue, green lights. So if some pixels are being less bright, that power can be diverted to other pixels. This is where 1000 cd/m² peak brightness comes in. If a scene in a movie has a small part of the scene as very bright... OLED can divert power to allow that bright part to reach 1000 cd/m².

The end result of all this is that when displaying actual scenes, a 250 cd/m² OLED is significantly brighter than a 250 cd/m² LCD.

And you are right this does stink because if someone hasn't studied how displays work, they will look at 250 cd/m² LCD and 250 cd/m² OLED and say they are the same. That is correct.. only when displaying full screen white. In an actual scene from a movie/game, the OLED will be significantly brighter. But the numbers don't convey that at all.

Here is an example of what I am talking about in terms of brightness. Left is LG C1 OLED. Right is Sony X85J LCD.





OLED gets brighter as you move away from a 100% white scene to 50% white scene. But it makes no difference to LCD. In a real scene, the OLED is a lot brighter (628 cd/m²) than what its 125 cd/m² would suggest.

The DisplayHDR 400 True Black certification requires:
- Sustained 10% window be >= 400 cd/m²
- Sustained 100% window be >= 250 cd/m²

The LG C1 meets the 10% window target (725 cd/m²) but fails to meet the 100% window target (125 cd/m²) and thus isn't certified. The Alienware can do 250 cd/m² at sustained 100% window and 450 cd/m² at 10% sustained window. The 1000 cd/m² is for 2% window. From the specifications, it looks like it will be good only for completely dark room HDR.

You're right, its a new way of reproducing color with HDR. Thanks for explaining it this way.

However for SDR, you're still going to be stuck with a lower static brightness, and 400cd/m2 is going to be a unicorn. Right?

Vayra86However for SDR, you're still going to be stuck with a lower static brightness, and 400cd/m2 is going to be a unicorn. Right?

It depends on how Alienware has configured their monitor.

LG C1 in SDR mode for example displays 150 cd/m² at 100% sustained window (a web browser for example). But for a sustained window of 50% and lower (thus, in movies and games) it gets to 300 cd/m².

This "feature" is called Automatic Brightness Limiter (ABL) and exists so that displaying full screen white doesn't fry the circuits of the display because displaying full white on OLED consumes a great amount of power. It is not a limitation of the Organic LEDs themselves.

I have a hunch that the Alienware will not have ABL for SDR and you are right that 400 cd/m² is going to be a unicorn. This is going to be a PC monitor and say you switch from Microsoft Word to YouTube (with dark mode on) and the display suddenly got much brighter.. it will be unexpected and quite irritating.

Alienware might give you an option to turn ABL On so that you can have brighter games and movies but I am 90% sure that even if that option is there, it will be turned off by default.

Vladiczechcurvature 1800R is too high

NordigaYou got the curvature numbers wrong, 1800R is a less aggressive curve than 1000R, an extreme curve like the Samsung Odyssey series use. As i like small curvatures, 1800R is the perfect curvature for me.

I suspect @Vladiczech means that the 1800R is too shallow for a desktop viewing distance.

The ideal curve radius matches your viewing distance and 1800R-3000R curvatures are better suited to televisions that are viewed from further away.

My 32" display is only 1800R and I wish it was 1500R or lower. Something that big and that close to my face really could do with a greater curvature but I'll take it over a flat display when it's that close to my face, just to somewhat mitigate the extreme viewing angle between opposite edges of the display...

Hands on from Vincent:

Vayra86You're right, its a new way of reproducing color with HDR. Thanks for explaining it this way.

However for SDR, you're still going to be stuck with a lower static brightness, and 400cd/m2 is going to be a unicorn. Right?

If you watched the video I linked earlier you would of seen all that information nicely condensed but instead immediately choose to dismiss it because once you heard "Sponsored by Samsung". Epitome of foolishness.

If Alienware are giving a 3-year burn-in warranty for a 250nit brightness, this gives me hope that we are not too far away from OLED technology that will last a decade at the ~150nits that I use for my desktop monitor. 250nits is a better brightness for a display that's used in a bright room but I have the luxury of positioning my desktop away from direct sunlight and strong reflections.

Not that I've kept a TV or monitor for more than 5 years in the last two decades though, I want new features like VRR, high refresh, HDR etc.

Vayra86Curved has a place, only a single one, I reckon, and that's 21:9 in a desktop setting at a larger diagonal (>30 inch).

I can genuinely say its an advantage there. I've also sat in front of larger curved TV's but that was utter crap.

I think curves get a bad rep because the 'sweet spot' is completely dependent on a proper viewing distance, in order to ensure equal distance from your face across the entirety of the screen. If you sit too far away, the edges are closer than the middle and vice-versa which surely will cause odd distortions. I don't know how many people are actually looking at them correctly before making judgements. I too have a curved ultrawide, and I'll never go back to flat screens.

With TV's I think the issue of 'sweet spot' is a far bigger problem. TV's must be placed in a general living environment, couches and chairs placed in accordance to the room layout etc. It's very hard to have the perfect viewing distance, centered to the screen, to get the same sweet spot in something other than a purpose built home theater (or a man cave). Monitors on the other hand can be shifted forwards/backwards on the desk to get it correctly distanced for a given panel size/curve radius. I feel like curved TV's were quickly relegated to the gimmick category because they are actually more harmful than good in a majority of general living rooms, but curved monitors on the other hand -when properly set up- are a big advantage just as you said.

Chrispy_Agreed. People forget that flat images suffer projection distortion and a curved image is actually less "wrong"

Very true, my curved screen was instantly comfortable and natural to look at on day one. Now that I have used it daily for quite a while, sometimes sitting in front of larger flat panels actually have a 'convex' illusion to them.