Deals of the week: monitors, monitors, monitors

This is weird. I think today is  "Worldwide Monitor Sale Day," but I haven't seen anything in the news, nor has Google put up a doodle for it. The deals are out there, though, and we've separated wheat from chaff to bring you the best.

  • Dell's U3415W is a big hunk o' monitor. It features 34 inches of curved IPS display goodness with a 3440×1440 resolution, integrated speakers, and a USB hub. Dell also offers three years of warranty coverage on this display. Newegg is offering it for $749.99 after promo code NEFPRDY20.

     

  • If you're looking for something a tad more gamey, Acer's XB270HU is on sale at Newegg for $699.99. The XB270HU is a 144Hz IPS display with a 2560×1440 resolution, a response time of 4ms, and support for Nvidia's G-Sync variable-refresh-rate technology. It comes with a USB 3.0 hub, too.

     

  • The Dell S2716DG is the company's first foray into G-Sync. This monitor has similar specs to the Acer above, except its panel is based on TN technology with a response time of 1ms. Dell offers a three-year warranty with advance replacement service. Grab it for $519.99 at Newegg.

     

  • Next up is Asus' MX299Q. This is a 29" ultra-wide AH-IPS monitor with a 2560×1080 resolution. It has thin bezels and comes with integrated speakers. It can be yours for $359.99 at Newegg.

     

  • Not every monitor has to be big or fancy. Dell's S2415H should fit the bill as a reliable workhorse. It's a 24" 1920×1080 IPS monitor with a six-millisecond response time and a 250 cd/m² maximum brightness figure. The monitor's bezels are quite thin, and it comes with a pair of three-watt speakers. Newegg is offering it for $149.99.

     

  • On the storage front, there's a great deal on an Adata SP550 960GB SSD. It's on sale at Newegg for $199.99, which works out to just under 21 cents a gigabyte. Grab it while it's hot.

     

  • Last but not least, we have the stylish Logitech G35 USB 7.1 headset. The G35 comes with three swappable headband pads, quick selection keys for different audio profiles, and a volume roller. The headset is on offer for $74.99 at the Newegg Marketplace.

That's it for today, folks! As always, if you come across any great hardware offers, be sure to post them in the comments section below.

Comments closed
    • nanoflower
    • 4 years ago

    Other deals to consider
    Upstar 28โ€ 4K UHD Monitor, with 2 HDMI Inputs and 2 DP, DVI Feature PIP $189 [url<]http://www.samsclub.com/sams/upstar-m280a1-28in-monitor/prod18580633.ip?sprodId=prod18580633?pid=_Aff_LS&siteID=lw9MynSeamY-ydSPzDssYtjzyFuq3SSoig[/url<] Dell Ultrasharp U2415 24-Inch Screen LED-Lit Monitor $259 [url<]http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NZTKOQI/ref=twister_B014R6JGR0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1[/url<]

      • Voldenuit
      • 4 years ago

      Now *that’s* a deal. Probably TN, but still a deal.

        • nanoflower
        • 4 years ago

        The review that I was pointed to says it’s an IPS panel but at that price you would think it’s a TN panel so who knows.

    • Oriflamme
    • 4 years ago

    These aren’t deals.

    You get me a good monitor, with a decent panel, with a higher than 60hz refresh rate, and is between $300-400 and I’ll call that a deal.

    • Voldenuit
    • 4 years ago

    Jesus, $500 for a TN 27″ 1440p monitor? Goddamnit Dell.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      If it’s the same panel employed by ASUS, then it’s a relatively good TN.

      If you believe in such things ;).

        • Voldenuit
        • 4 years ago

        According to tftcentral, it’s a 27″WS AU Optronics TN Film (M270DTN01.5).

        The Asus ROG Swift PG278Q uses a 27″WS AU Optronics TN Film (M270Q002 V0), so not the exact same panel, no idea if it’s better or worse.

        Tftcentral has a review here, though.
        [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_s2716dg.htm[/url<]

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 4 years ago

      They just released a similarly priced 1440p eps 27″ infinity edge

    • Welch
    • 4 years ago

    Not really seeing anything about any of these listings as “Deals”… sorry. I guess my mentality is, if there isn’t really a DEAL then I wouldn’t bother making a post about deals /shrug. Seems to be pretty dry this time of the year for deals anyway as we aren’t that far beyond the Christmas/Black Friday hardware dump.

    Seriously not one of those modern monitors is sub $300. Also still find it funny that 24” monitors by today’s standards are “not big or fancy” lol. Man we have become spoiled (myself included)

    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 4 years ago

    Reasonably priced 24″ OLED monitors when

      • Firestarter
      • 4 years ago

      Soon(tm)

      • GrimDanfango
      • 4 years ago

      Valve-time ain’t got nothin’ on OLED-time! ๐Ÿ™‚

      At any point within the next decade… maybe. Of course, I said something similar over a decade ago.

    • Tirk
    • 4 years ago

    Those monitor sales don’t look good at all, the Dell’s U3415W has hovered around that price for at least a year. I also found the IPS glow on the Dell’s U3415W to be pretty strong and decided not to get it.

    • blastdoor
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]x1440[/quote<] That was pretty impressive 6 years ago. I can't see buying anything less than 4k from here on out.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      Can you see yourself buying fewer than three video cards either?

      ๐Ÿ˜‰

        • anotherengineer
        • 4 years ago

        To run 2D windows desktop??

        I thought that’s why MS went to 2-bit color pallet so integrated graphics could run 4k ๐Ÿ˜‰

        • Hinton
        • 4 years ago

        You’re not funny. Your comment is stupid.

        You can run 4k with the integrated GPU.

          • Airmantharp
          • 4 years ago

          And you’re going to run The Division or The Witcher 3 on an iGPU?

          I get what you’re saying, but you’re being intentionally obtuse to my point- and *that’s* stupid ;).

            • Waco
            • 4 years ago

            You still don’t need multiple cards to run 4K. Sure, if you want to max things out, but 1920×1080 on a 4K panel looks quite nice and requires a lot less GPU grunt.

            • Airmantharp
            • 4 years ago

            You are quite right- and one could easily make use of a 4k panel for things other than current AAA titles, while gaming at a lower resolution. Do note that my comment was a bit tongue in cheek- intentionally so, as to point out that 4k isn’t the answer to everything. Particularly, a family member wanted to buy a larger monitor and was inadvertently looking at 4k monitors in the ~27″ range, for a Windows box- I made sure to quickly explain to them why that might not be a good idea, as Windows scaling isn’t hardly perfect, and if something can’t be scaled, it will be quite hard for aging eyes to see!

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      If you are talking about 3440×144034 inch monitors you don’t know what you are talking about… The ultrawide master race is worth joining. Best gaming monitors around.

      • smilingcrow
      • 4 years ago

      Depends on screen size, usage and budget; there’s no one size fits all in the real world my good man.

        • blastdoor
        • 4 years ago

        Just to clarify — I cannot see *me* buying anything less than 4K from here out.

        I can easily imagine others doing it, though. I agree that if your primary use for a computer is playing games, then 4K makes no sense.

          • Voldenuit
          • 4 years ago

          Well, 4k runs 1080p at a perfect 2:1 ratio, so can be great for gaming even if you don’t have a 980Ti or Fury.

          1440p is a nice compromise on screen space and gaming, though (and price).

            • Demetri
            • 4 years ago

            My understanding is there are no 4K monitors available that use integer/nearest-neighbor scaling on 1080P signals, and there is no support in Nvidia/AMD’s drivers to do that type of scaling with the GPU either.

            If you’re running 1080P on a 4K screen, is seems the monitor is using its own (likely bi-linear) interpolation algorithm, and it will be at least somewhat more blurry than on a native 1080P screen.

      • wimpishsundew
      • 4 years ago

      On the internet, everyone has dual TitanXYZ in SLI, triple 8k screen, the latest i7 9990K Extreme Super Black Hole Edition.

      Then you read real statistics and realize that there are more 768p owners than 4k.

        • JustAnEngineer
        • 4 years ago

        The currently-installed population of monitors represents the monitors that have been purchased and put into service in the past 15 years. If you are buying a new monitor TODAY, you definitely should NOT be trying to match the average from several years ago.

        P.S.: My 2560×1600 UltraSharp 3007WFP is nine years old.

          • paulWTAMU
          • 4 years ago

          You’re not wrong but 4k monitors are still pretty dang expensive and not that common.

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 4 years ago

            4K monitors aren’t all that expensive. Remember that they have four times as many pixels as puny 1080p monitors do.
            I’m moderately tempted to see how well my 980Ti could drive this display.
            [url<]http://www.samsclub.com/sams/43-120hz-led-smart-uhd-5-hdmi-wifi/prod17500153.ip[/url<]

            • jts888
            • 4 years ago

            Vizio UHD M-series doesn’t do 4:4:4 chroma at 60 Hz, so that monitor’s not a good a deal as you might think.

            In general, people should consider splurging more on their displays than on their GPUs, given the difference in useful lifespans. FWIW, DP 1.3 displays should start coming out at the end of this year with UHD@120Hz (60Hz for 36bpp HDR), which should be more pixel bandwidth than any GPU in the next several years should come close to being limited by.

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 4 years ago

            Not even through the 5th HDMI input? It’s purported to support HDMI 2.0, HDCP 2.2 and 3840×2160 @60Hz.

      • f0d
      • 4 years ago

      you should know TR by now
      anything above or below 1440/27″ is bad

        • Firestarter
        • 4 years ago

        I have 23″ 1080p, hold me ๐Ÿ™

          • smilingcrow
          • 4 years ago

          You are so low rez that if I reach for you I may grab an inappropriate part of you and be arrested!

          • paulWTAMU
          • 4 years ago

          No. you’re sticky and sweaty. What were you *watchign* on that monitor?!

          I’m a 22″ 1080p myself. *sigh*

          • f0d
          • 4 years ago

          dont worry i have 2560×1080 34″
          “supposedly” the pixels on my screen are the size of lego blocks

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 4 years ago

            81.7 pixels per inch? Those might be Duplos! ๐Ÿ˜‰

            • f0d
            • 4 years ago

            hahahaha.!
            you actually made me laugh for real ๐Ÿ™‚

            admittedly i love my screen with the pixel size of duplos despite people telling me its horrible on reddit/forums etc

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 4 years ago

            I’ve reached the age that anything tinier than 100 pixels/inch requires me to wear glasses, so big pixels aren’t all bad.

    • The Egg
    • 4 years ago

    Is anyone else as frustrated as me? NVidia released the G-Sync card over 2 1/2 years ago, and there’s still a lack of adaptive sync models to choose from. Those we do have are 40-50% more than they should be.

      • Noigel
      • 4 years ago

      Yes. Also read the customer reviews on Amazon for the ones currently available… they appear to be unstable, crap monitors… many dying months after purchase. I couldn’t pull the trigger buying one.

      • Peter.Parker
      • 4 years ago

      Early adopters takes risks. Betamax, HD-DVD, Zune are just a few examples of frustration memorabilia I can quote. Welcome to the club.

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 4 years ago

      The way it’s meant to be pricedยฎ

        • The Egg
        • 4 years ago

        I’m not terribly impressed with the cost of Freesync models either. While they do cost less, for something that was supposed to cost almost nothing to implement they’re not exactly priced to fly off the shelves. That’s helping keep G-Sync afloat as well.

          • DPete27
          • 4 years ago

          Are you comparing free sync monitors to run of the mill 60Hz monitors, or the more equivalent 144Hz models?

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 4 years ago

            [url<]https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=117205&p=1291254&hilit=#p1291254[/url<] VESA standard Adaptive Sync (aka AMD's FreeSync) looks to be $170 to $270 more reasonable than NVidia's proprietary G-Sync.

            • Billstevens
            • 4 years ago

            Yeah they are only putting freesync on pretty high end monitors. But it clearly costs little given the crazy price bump for gsync equivalents.

          • Demetri
          • 4 years ago

          You can get a 24″ IPS/PLS Freesync monitor for $180… and this was on sale a few weeks ago for like $150.

          [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824022308[/url<] Cheapest Gsync out there seems to be $400.

            • anotherengineer
            • 4 years ago

            Now if that would become common in all monitors (since it’s basically a vesa standard) and it would go down to 23/24 fps, I would be clicking buy on some monitor right now.

            • Voldenuit
            • 4 years ago

            24 fps for watching movies?

            You’d be better off frame doubling at 48 fps (or tripling to 72), as long refresh delays lead to color accuracy decay in the pixels.

            • anotherengineer
            • 4 years ago

            Good idea.

            But for games also, if freesync went that low it would help for dips/lag also.

        • Welch
        • 4 years ago

        Perhaps you meant… “nVidia, the way you’re meant to be played!”

    • RoxasForTheWin
    • 4 years ago

    That dell s2716dg looks tempting, I’m hoping it will reach that 500$ mark when I’m looking for another monitor in sometime in June

    • derFunkenstein
    • 4 years ago

    Yikes on that G35. I paid $50 from Amazon last summer. It’s nice, but wowza. I didn’t realize what a deal I was getting at the time – it’s $90 there now.

    The G35 is a really nice headset, though. It has a flip-up microphone boom that mutes automatically and a side-mounted volume roller. Both of those things work without Logitech’s software, which is nice. The audio quality is good enoughโ€”not audiophile quality, but clear and relatively flat.

    My only real complaint is that I can’t hear myself when I talk. The headset doesn’t play the incoming audio into the cans, which would be nice addition. Instead, you have to turn on “listen to this input” in Windows (or whatever it’s called), and then the audio lags behind real time, basically functioning as a speech jammer.

      • mesyn191
      • 4 years ago

      Changeable ear rest pads would’ve made a $75 price tag more reasonable IMO.

      Leatherette/Vynil is just too sweaty for me. Fabric or microfiber is so much better.

      Making them removable would also make them washable or at least replaceable when they get gross too.

      • morphine
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]"My only real complaint is that I can't hear myself when I talk."[/quote<] Now if that worked externally... ๐Ÿ˜‰ *badum-tssshhh* (j/k buddy ๐Ÿ™‚

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This