Some mixed results for these curved monitors. See what our testers found in their review:
Interesting. I could see the merit in having a curved screen if when sitting, it covered curved around to cover most of ones (near and mid and possibly some of the far) peripheral vision…as it would give a greater experience when using the screen. Having it curve in the paracentral and possible some near peripheral vision, I don’t really see a huge benefit over flatscreens.
I wonder unless screens curve around ones head, whether such screens will fall into the same boat as 3D screens/TVs.
I wonder who their intended target market was?
I have some concerns about the terminology used in this review, and note that it missed some important points.
References to “1080px full HD” and “1440px” do not align with standard practice. The generally accepted terms are 1080p and 1440p, with the “p” representing “progressive scan” (not pixels, although the number is the count of vertical pixels).
The reference to “full HD” is correct. 1440p is also known as Quad HD.
1000R is not explained in the article, and is only mentioned once - in the “Tech specs”.
This seems to be a big omission, as it is the key selling point for these monitors. 1000 refers to the radius of a circle - in mm - for which the monitor forms one part; so if the monitor kept going one could sit in the middle and be 100cm away from the monitor in every direction (ignoring the size of one’s head). That is a tight circle in monitor terms, with 1800R being the smallest ‘normal’ curvature.
The article does not mention one of the major problems with curved screens and productivity software. You will see this problem immediately - and it gets worse with screens curved as tightly as the reviewed models - if you open a spreadsheet that fills the screen. Trying to make sense of which row contains which data can apparently present quite an obstacle - and I expect this applies to word processing and other productivity applications.
As stated in the article, it is hard to see the target audience for these monitors. Too curved for productivity, resolution too low for gaming (although the refresh rate is not mentioned in the article - if it is high then they might be okay for gaming, except the response time is not going to help much), and pretty average video display.
I have now looked at what Samsung says about these two monitors. A refresh rate of 75Hz is higher than the industry-standard 60Hz (which is the sort-of maybe standard TV refresh rate , and 24Hz for movies) - but nothing special in an era of 240Hz monitors.
The target market appears to be cashed up tech-heads who need the latest kit but are not discerning whether or how well it works, or is suitable for anything they do? From the review they look as much like furniture as monitors. There might be enough of them to make it a seller…
The information contained in the review is very useful.
I’ve been looking for a replacement for the ancient 720p 19” TFT based monitor I currently use. From the reviews it is unlikely the replacement will be one of those tested or anything with similar specifications.
The jump in price to a Samsung Odyssey G7 27” or 32” monitor (or G9) is significant. In the interests of consumer value, surely there are some similar sized quality QHD monitors that sit between those in the review and the more capable gaming/video style monitors. Screens that suit everyday browsing and productivity, without the need to find more room for multiple monitors side by side.
The principle of using a larger monitor at a greater eye distance (approx 1.0m) appeals as the need for reading glasses disappears. At least for now.
We have been using a Philips 24" LCD monitor since 2014 which we bought from Officeworks. It is great and has had no problems.
I see that Officeworks has a Philips 24" FHD IPS Business Monitor for $248.00 and a Philips 23.8" FHD LCD Monitor for $168.00.
You bet. A quick staticICE search for 27" QHD comes up with monitors priced from $329. Changing the search to look for 32" QHD, prices start at $339. Sure they go up to $1,149 - but there are plenty of options under $500, and if you want to be able to use the screen without reading glasses I would suggest that the larger size would probably be a better choice.