AGON by AOC Unveils the C27G2Z3 Full HD 280Hz Curved Monitor

[btarunr]

AGON by AOC—one of the world's leading gaming monitor and IT accessories brands - is thrilled to announce the AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK, a curved 27" (68.6 cm) Full HD monitor that combines immersive visuals with lightning-fast performance. Designed to cater to both competitive and casual gamers, the C27G2Z3/BK boasts an impressive 280 Hz refresh rate, up to 1 ms GtG and 0.5 ms MPRT response times, and a high-contrast Fast VA panel with a 1500R curvature, all at an affordable price point.

The AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK's 1500R curvature envelops users in the game world, providing an immersive experience that draws them deeper into the action. The curved 27" screen offers a more natural and comfortable viewing experience, reducing eye strain and fatigue during extended gaming sessions. Whether racing through the streets in a high-speed simulation or exploring vast open worlds, the C27G2Z3/BK's curvature enhances the sense of presence and engagement for the user.



Lightning-fast performance for a competitive edge
With a blistering 280 Hz refresh rate, the AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK beats the current esports standard of 240 Hz, and delivers ultra-smooth and responsive gameplay, giving gamers the edge in fast-paced, competitive titles. The monitor can achieve up to 1 ms GtG response time, using the highest overdrive setting, which ensures that ghosting and motion blur are virtually eliminated, whilst providing crisp and clear visuals. For an even smoother experience, the C27G2Z3/BK features an MBR (Motion Blur Reduction) setting using a strobing backlight that enables a 0.5 ms MPRT (Moving Picture Response Time), further enhancing motion clarity.

High-contrast visuals with HDR10
The Fast VA panel of the AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK delivers exceptional image quality with a high contrast ratio of 4000:1, ensuring deep blacks and vibrant colors for a truly immersive visual experience. With HDR10 compliance, the monitor can display a wider range of brightness and color levels, bringing out the finest details in both dark and bright scenes. The Full HD resolution (1920x1080) strikes a fine balance between visual clarity and performance, allowing even mid-range GPUs to achieve the monitor's impressive 280 Hz refresh rate and enjoy high-framerate gameplay for many titles.

Adaptive-Sync for tear-free gaming
To eliminate screen tearing and stuttering, the AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK supports Adaptive-Sync technology, synchronizing the monitor's refresh rate with the GPU's output for a seamless and fluid gaming experience. This technology is compatible with both NVIDIA and AMD GPUs, ensuring that the vast majority of users can enjoy smooth gameplay.

Ergonomic design for comfort and convenience
The C27G2Z3/BK features a sturdy and adjustable stand with 130 mm height adjustment, tilt, and swivel functionality, allowing users to find the perfect viewing angle for their setup. The monitor's slim bezels and sleek design make it an attractive addition to any gaming space, while its VESA mount compatibility offers additional flexibility for wall mounting or multi-monitor setups.

Pricing and availability
The AOC GAMING C27G2Z3/BK will be available from late June 2024, backed by a 3-year warranty, at an attractive MSRP of £199.99.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Chrispy_]

The problem with VA gaming monitors is that there are so many models being constantly released and buying one without a review that measures response time is a gamble with pretty low odds of success. It feels like 60-70% of VA "gaming" monitors can't even get 60Hz without smearing.

Most VAs have dark smearing issues with black-to-grey transitions that can take 30ms or more. What's the point in advertising something as 280Hz if the pixels aren't even fit for 30Hz? When you find a fast VA panel that can actually handle black-to-grey transitions fast enough to avoid smearing, you'll wonder why anyone bothers with the washed-out-compromise that is IPS. VA's inky blacks, huge contrast and vivid colours make it a very appealing proposition, but ONLY if it's not a smeary mess in motion.

We need more reviews, and sadly every site/channel focuses the lion's share of their coverage on OLED these days so there are precious few VA and IPS reviews any more. I tried an AOC gaming monitor about 4 years ago before buying the Odyssey G7, and it was without a doubt the slowest panel I've ever seen in my life - when the retailer wanted a reason for me returning it, I uploaded a photo of Quake3 Arena locked to 20fps and you could count THREE distinct after-images (effectively 7Hz pixel refresh rate). At 144Hz a photo of Path of Exile where the labels on everything are white text on a black box, I counted 8-9 repeated frames - that's 16Hz when running at it's maximum fixed refresh rate (therefore ruling out VRR's impact on pixel overdrive modes).

(image dug out of my Google Photos archive from AOC CQ32G1 return, 2020)

So yeah, AOC can announce all the curved VA monitors they want, but they need to stop pretending they're "1ms" displays until they can work out how to overdrive a panel properly like Dell, Samsung, or Asus.

 

[Anymal]

Not clicking on read more for fhd monitor in 2024

 

[Philaphlous]

27" 1080p monitor? gross... My 28" 4k monitor is the largest I would go for pixel density purposes...but man...this is gonna hurt the eyes of the little ones that use this.

Also, just recently started using a curved monitor... verdict is still out...not sure I like it...not sure I see much of a benefit...

 

[Chrispy_]

27" 1080p monitor? gross... My 28" 4k monitor is the largest I would go for pixel density purposes...but man...this is gonna hurt the eyes of the little ones that use this.

Also, just recently started using a curved monitor... verdict is still out...not sure I like it...not sure I see much of a benefit...

Curve on a 27" or 28"? It's a bit pointless as the actual viewing angle difference between centre and far edges when sat at a normal 60cm viewing distance is going to be marginal between flat and curved. Maybe 20° off-angle at worst, which is usually within the panel's sweet spot for viewing angles.

Where curved panels start to make a lot of sense are on ultrawides and anything over 32" where the middle of a flat display is 60cm away from you but the edge could be 80cm away or more, and up to 40° off-angle which affects gamma, contrast, and brightness, too. Whilst it's not something I currently suffer from, reading from left-to-right across a large, flat display requires constant changes in focal length and the older you get the stiffer your eyeball's lenses get which means this constant change of focal length as you scan each line of text can cause very rapid eyestrain and fatigue.

The downside to curved displays, IME, is that the backlight diffuser seems much harder to get perfectly aligned than it does on a flat display so most curved panels have a little bit of edge leakage and often some black uniformity problems.

 

[MentalAcetylide]

Curve on a 27" or 28"? It's a bit pointless as the actual viewing angle difference between centre and far edges when sat at a normal 60cm viewing distance is going to be marginal between flat and curved. Maybe 20° off-angle at worst, which is usually within the panel's sweet spot for viewing angles.

Where curved panels start to make a lot of sense are on ultrawides and anything over 32" where the middle of a flat display is 60cm away from you but the edge could be 80cm away or more, and up to 40° off-angle which affects gamma, contrast, and brightness, too. Whilst it's not something I currently suffer from, reading from left-to-right across a large, flat display requires constant changes in focal length and the older you get the stiffer your eyeball's lenses get which means this constant change of focal length as you scan each line of text can cause very rapid eyestrain and fatigue.

The downside to curved displays, IME, is that the backlight diffuser seems much harder to get perfectly aligned than it does on a flat display so most curved panels have a little bit of edge leakage and often some black uniformity problems.

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I avoid curved. However, they would be awesome for viewing rendered images & content designed for it. For example, I could render stuff with a camera that uses focal settings that would actually make it look flat on a curved screen(of course, the same image wouldn't look right on a flat screen). Nevertheless, imo I don't think most of us have a need for them.

 

[Pooch]

Not clicking on read more for fhd monitor in 2024

Yea they didn't include the literal reference to resolution (1080) because they are banking on the idea that most people still don't know what HD vs FULL HD vs QHD means, so they just say full hd and hope you don't notice the mc Escher painting of stairs that follows.

 

[Onasi]

@Chrispy_
Hot take - for typical desktop work 24 inches is the optimal-ish screen size. Even 27 inches is arguably pushing it. The curve is essentially an attempted solution to a self-inflicted issue on display industry part.

 

[AsRock]

The problem with VA gaming monitors is that there are so many models being constantly released and buying one without a review that measures response time is a gamble with pretty low odds of success. It feels like 60-70% of VA "gaming" monitors can't even get 60Hz without smearing.

Most VAs have dark smearing issues with black-to-grey transitions that can take 30ms or more. What's the point in advertising something as 280Hz if the pixels aren't even fit for 30Hz? When you find a fast VA panel that can actually handle black-to-grey transitions fast enough to avoid smearing, you'll wonder why anyone bothers with the washed-out-compromise that is IPS. VA's inky blacks, huge contrast and vivid colours make it a very appealing proposition, but ONLY if it's not a smeary mess in motion.

We need more reviews, and sadly every site/channel focuses the lion's share of their coverage on OLED these days so there are precious few VA and IPS reviews any more. I tried an AOC gaming monitor about 4 years ago before buying the Odyssey G7, and it was without a doubt the slowest panel I've ever seen in my life - when the retailer wanted a reason for me returning it, I uploaded a photo of Quake3 Arena locked to 20fps and you could count THREE distinct after-images (effectively 7Hz pixel refresh rate). At 144Hz a photo of Path of Exile where the labels on everything are white text on a black box, I counted 8-9 repeated frames - that's 16Hz when running at it's maximum fixed refresh rate (therefore ruling out VRR's impact on pixel overdrive modes).

View attachment 352181 (image dug out of my Google Photos archive from AOC CQ32G1 return, 2020)

So yeah, AOC can announce all the curved VA monitors they want, but they need to stop pretending they're "1ms" displays until they can work out how to overdrive a panel properly like Dell, Samsung, or Asus.

Chances is they are but it's gray to gray BS which they all started years ago and not how it used to be done, like black to white which is much harder to achieve.

 

[NoneRain]

FullHD 27"........................

 

[Chrispy_]

@Chrispy_
Hot take - for typical desktop work 24 inches is the optimal-ish screen size. Even 27 inches is arguably pushing it. The curve is essentially an attempted solution to a self-inflicted issue on display industry part.

Forget screen size, Windows display scaling is awful, so what you need is as close the the ideal 96dpi as possible, or an integer multiple of that, so 192dpi.

The size of your screen is kind of irrelevant as people effectively expand their screen with second, third, sixth monitors.
What's important to note is that nobody with three screens has them all lined up with each other flat, each screen points towards the user, creating a low-poly curve, because that's both comfortable and natural. We want to look directly at an image, not view it from the side. That's why the premium seats in a cinema are in the middle, not at the edges, and it's why the best spot of the sofa for watching TV content is the one directly in front of the TV.

 

[Onasi]

Forget screen size, Windows display scaling is awful, so what you need is as close the the ideal 96dpi as possible, or an integer multiple of that, so 192dpi.

Yeah, issue here is that it’s not a ppi combo that’s easily obtainable. Closest theoretical would be what, 23 inches 4K? Guess we can go with 24 too for “close enough”.
5K at 27 inches is also a potential compromise, I think that would get 1440p equivalent at 200% scaling and people seem to be fine with that combo.

 

[MacZ]

According to Steam hardware survey, 66% of people use 1080p or less, about 20% use 1440p and a tiny fraction (and declining) use 4K.

What that tells you, with the fact that these high resolution monitors exist for a long time now, is that these monitors are firmly in diminishing returns territory : nice to have but by no means an obligation. Especially since it implies additional costs to drive these higher resolutions.

Like paying for a PCIE 5 SSD to load your level in 3 seconds instead of 5.

Like pushing every graphical element to 'ultra' when they are almost identical to 'very high' or 'high', except in processing power needed.

Like having a 240Hz monitor when most people would be hard pressed to distinguish 60Hz from 100Hz or higher.

And boasting about possessing these monitors when you are in a small minority, because they're not really that important, has a name : snobism.

 

[Minus Infinity]

@Chrispy_
Hot take - for typical desktop work 24 inches is the optimal-ish screen size. Even 27 inches is arguably pushing it. The curve is essentially an attempted solution to a self-inflicted issue on display industry part.

Was that the 11 commandment I must have missed. I can't think of much worse than working on a tiny 24" screen and 27" is the bare minimum I would accept, and after 15 years it's far too limiting. How close to your 27" monitor do you sit that a curve is necessary.

 

[SPARSTE96]

27" 1080p is NOT good...

 

[ARF]

According to Steam hardware survey, 66% of people use 1080p or less, about 20% use 1440p and a tiny fraction (and declining) use 4K.

Instead, 1280x800 is rising

Steam is a very large pile of ....

 

[Chrispy_]

Not clicking on read more for fhd monitor in 2024

/playing the devil's advocate:

Meanwhile, Nvidia is still trying to push 8GB cards with paltry 128-bit memory buses that CANNOT handle more than 1080p all the way up into the $400 GPU market. AMD aren't much better with the RX 7600 at $270. Sure, it's not as bad but when a 1080p graphics card costs more than a decent 1440p gaming monitor, perhaps we do need FHD displays again!?

 

[ARF]

/playing the devil's advocate:

Meanwhile, Nvidia is still trying to push 8GB cards with paltry 128-bit memory buses that CANNOT handle more than 1080p all the way up into the $400 GPU market. AMD aren't much better with the RX 7600 at $270. Sure, it's not as bad but when a 1080p graphics card costs more than a decent 1440p gaming monitor, perhaps we do need FHD displays again!?

Why not simply stop donating to the never-ending-hungry jacketed man unjustified sums for products which barely qualify as better than simply trash ?

 

[Chrispy_]

Why not simply stop donating to the never-ending-hungry jacketed man unjustified sums for products which barely qualify as better than simply trash ?

It's not just him though, 1440p GPUs from ANY brand are vastly more expensive than 1440p monitors.

Blame game developers, unreaslistic expectations from gamers, reviews that always test sub-optimal ultra settings, or just the increased manufacturing costs of electronics in China/Taiwan - it doesn't matter - the facts are that AAA gaming in 2024 at >1080p requires expensive hardware if you want don't want to compromise on settings or frame rate.

If you're okay with 1080p and optimised settings you can pick up something like an RX5700 on eBay for peanuts, and older GPUs like the GTX1080 or 1660S are still plenty fast enough to enjoy modern games.

 

[ARF]

1440p GPUs from ANY brand are vastly more expensive than 1440p monitors.

Depends on what exactly you think a 1440p GPU is.
I wouldn't write this type of verdict down, because I'm afraid that it is not very correct.
You can find any type of monitor, at any type of price tag. For example, a 200-buck GPU with 1500-bucks monitor. And vice versa.

There are already very cheap 4K monitors:

But there are also very expensive ones, too:

A cheap 4K GPU costs 399 bucks.

If you're okay with 1080p and optimised settings you can pick up something like an RX5700 on eBay for peanuts, and older GPUs like the GTX1080 or 1660S are still plenty fast enough to enjoy modern games.

I am not ok. I am ok at 4K, and if the GPU power is not enough, there are always mid and low settings.

 

[MacZ]

Instead, 1280x800 is rising

View attachment 352310

Steam is a very large pile of ....

It's facts.

You have no arguments. You just don't like facts and resort to name calling.

1440p and 2160p are not taking the place of 1080p or are doing it at a pace that is so glacial that you can consider it isn't happening.

1440p and 2160p users are in fact paying for premium PC/gaming experiences and as such should not be suprised that the likes of Nvidia are treating them accordingly.

 

[Chrispy_]

Depends on what exactly you think a 1440p GPU is.

I was pretty damn specific, if you actually read the posts.

"AAA gaming in 2024 at >1080p requires expensive hardware if you want don't want to compromise on settings or frame rate"

>1080p = 1440p
AAA games or AAA DLC's launched in the last year.
uncompromised settings (very high, or ultra)
uncompromised framerate (60fps minimum, but monitor's refresh rate preferred)

I'm also completely clueless about why you're linking medical OLED displays for hospitals in a gaming monitor thread, but you do you. Whatever point you are trying to make is nonsensical to me, so I've stopped paying attention.

I am not ok. I am ok at 4K, and if the GPU power is not enough, there are always mid and low settings.

So why are you even here?
This monitor isn't for you.
This thread isn't for you.
Nobody is forcing you to buy a 1080p monitor.
Feel free to move on.

 

[AusWolf]

FullHD on 27"? Yuck!

 

[MacZ]

FullHD on 27"? Yuck!

Same as 4K on 55" ... like most TV. weird eh ?

 

[AusWolf]

Same as 4K on 55" ... like most TV. weird eh ?

Except that you sit at a considerable distance from your TV, whereas your monitor is right in your face.