Design & Ergonomics
The design doesn’t allow even basic adjustments, so the ergonomics of this monitor are terrible. You can only tilt the monitor and adjust the screen’s curve. The monitor’s height is fixed at 57 cm, and the stand is also fixed since it contains all connections, so you cannot use a VESA mount. This is highly disappointing.
The build quality looks nice overall, with the only exception being the plastic handles for adjusting the screen’s curve, which don’t look so durable. But in any way, you should not use excess force on them.
Pages:
From a technical standpoint (bendable) it’s an interesting offering.Thanks for the small review.
I wouldn’t buy it though. I’m not buying any PC-monitors at all anymore.
They are literally garbage when it comes to image quality, compared to what modern W-Oled or QD-Oled TVs offer.
Especially the matte AG-coating lowers the image quality by a large margin.
TVs superior multi-layered AR-coating increases image quality greatly.
99.x % of PC monitors have that crap AG-coating or an inferior AR-coating (not nearly as good as those found on modern TVs), so no luck here.
A Samsung S95C QD-Oled 55 inch, laps this monitor regarding image quality two times or so lol,
and has a ton of hardware- and software features, including frame interpolation (as Nvidias dlss 3).
Even runs at 4K-Uhd + 144 Hz ๐
And 55 inch the immersion is awesome.
And it doesn’t need to stand on a desktop table either, but behind it on a TV-pedestal.
I guess most PC users haven’t understood it yet that they’ are NOT constrained by the size of their table, but can put things behind it ๐
Na, monitors have a horrible price-performance ratio. This one for 1000 bucks, maybe, but not for 1700.
Why are PC users buy overpriced 2000 bucks graphics cards, when their image quality still stays low, du to inferior PC-monitors?
Makes little sense to me.
Cheers.