Philips 346B1C

Interlace pattern artifacts

On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern, mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal or vertical bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade. We didn’t observe dynamic interlace patterns on this model but did observe some faint static interlace pattern artifacts. Particularly but not exclusively for some medium grey, red and orange shades. Sensitive users might notice this, but the pattern is rather faint so shouldn’t bother or even be noticed by most users.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A small utility called SMTT 2.0 was used alongside a sensitive camera to analyse the latency of the 346B1C, with over 30 repeat readings taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 8.08ms (a bit over 3/4 of frame at 100Hz) of input lag. Note that the input lag measured here is influenced by both the element you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a reasonably low signal delay which most users should be comfortable with. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with Adaptive-Sync active in a variable refresh rate environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

Our article on responsiveness explores key concepts related to monitor responsiveness. One of these important concepts is ‘perceived blur’, which is contributed to by both the movement of your eyes as you track motion on the screen and the pixel responses of the monitor. Most of the perceived blur observed on a modern monitor comes from the movement of your eyes, but pixel responses are also important. The article also explores ‘pursuit photography’, which uses a moving rather than static camera to capture motion on a monitor in a way that reflects both key aspects of perceived blur. This contrasts with static photography or videos, which only reflect pixel responsiveness.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the test running at 960 pixels per second. This is a good practical speed for capturing such photographs and highlights both elements of perceived blur nicely. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. All background shade levels (dark, medium and light) were used with the monitor set to all its ‘SmartResponse’ pixel overdrive settings; ‘Off’, ‘Fast’, ‘Faster’ and ‘Fastest’. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below) and 100Hz. The two final columns shows 2 reference displays, both set to what we consider their optimal pixel overdrive settings at 60Hz and 100Hz. The ASUS MX34VQ, which uses a similar VA panel to this model. And the ViewSonic XG240R, a fast TN model which shows how things look where pixel responsiveness isn’t a significant limiting factor.



At 60Hz (above), the UFOs appear unfocused without clear internal detailing. This reflects a moderate level of perceived blur due to eye movement. Note that this relatively soft appearance appears for the UFO even on the fast TN reference shot and is closely tied to the 60Hz refresh rate. Various levels of trailing can be seen behind the UFOs, too, due to weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. This is reduced somewhat as the ‘SmartResponse’ setting is increased. With the ‘Faster’ setting, for example, there’s a clear ‘heavy powdery’ trailing behind the object for the dark background (top row). This is less extensive for the medium background (middle row), although the trailing is still quite bold directly behind the UFO. The light background (bottom row) shows very little in the way of conventional trailing. There’s a touch of overshoot (inverse ghosting) – a slight ‘halo’ trail that’s brighter than the object or background colour. This is increased when using the ‘Fastest’ setting and also introduced for the medium background there. The overshoot is more noticeable in this example for the light background of the ASUS MX34VQ reference. In practice we still found some obvious examples of overshoot on the Philips using the ‘Fastest’ setting and preferred the ‘Faster’ setting at 60Hz. The images below show things bumped up to 100Hz.



At 100Hz (above), the UFOs appear narrower with somewhat clearer internal detailing. This reflects a reduction in perceived blur due to eye movement. There are again various degrees of trailing behind the UFOs. Ever increasing ‘SmartResponse’ settings show a gradual reduction in this trailing. By the time you read the ‘Faster’ setting, there’s only a faint whiff of ‘powdery’ trailing for the light background, but a fairly bold trail for the medium background and to a greater extent the dark background. Comparing this setting to the MX34VQ reference, things look fairly similar overall. The trailing for the medium background is somewhat more extended on the ASUS but also fainter overall, the trailing right beside the UFO does not appear as bold. For the light background, the ‘powdery’ trailing is replaced with some bright ‘halo’ trailing on the ASUS. This can be seen on the Philips when it’s set to the ‘Fastest’ setting as well – for some transitions this is more obvious than it appears here, for the light backlight of this test. For that reason we consider the ‘Faster’ setting optimal at 100Hz as well.

Note that we will not be including a section on overclocking, as the monitor refused to display an image when set much above 100Hz at its native resolution or indeed lower resolutions such as Full HD.

Responsiveness in games and movies

On Battlefield V, where the frame rate kept up with the refresh rate, the monitor provided a fair amount of perceived blur. This was largely down to eye movement and tied to the 100Hz refresh rate. With over 1.5 times as much visual information being outputted every second as a 60Hz monitor, there was a reduction in perceived blur overall. This also aided the ‘connected feel’, which describes the precision and fluidity when interacting with your character and the game world. Coupled with reasonably low input lag levels, the monitor did quite well in that respect. There were some definite weaknesses in pixel responsiveness, which added to perceived blur. There was an additional mask of perceived blur even for some transitions involving medium and lighter shades, a bit of a ‘powdery’ trailing on top of what you’d ideally see. There were some more distinct weaknesses where darker shades were involved in the transition, including some ‘smeary’ trailing. This was certainly not the slowest VA model we’ve come across, but the weaknesses were a bit more noticeable and more widespread than on some of the other high refresh rate VA UltraWides we’ve used, including the ASUS MX34VQ. There was also a bit of overshoot in places, but this only affected a small number of transitions and was generally faint using our preferred ‘SmartResponse’ setting. The section of the video review below runs through some of the strengths and weaknesses of the monitor’s response performance. As noted there this monitor is not designed or marketed as a gaming monitor – although some users would find the performance when gaming just fine anyway.

We made similar observations on Shadow of the Tomb Raider. There were quite a few transitions involving darker shades here, with plenty of dimly lit locations. There was some ‘smeary’ trailing in places including what we call ‘break-up’ trailing. Whereby some of the shades contained in the object or background colour appear to leach out as if you’ve wet a page with water soluble ink on it. For example, some dark red hues sometimes appear in the trailing as you move past illuminated and darker sections of cave wall. This was not as extensive as the sort of ‘break-up’ trailing you see on the slowest VA performers, which give more of an extended smoke-like appearance. It won’t necessarily catch everyone’s eye or detract from their enjoyment when gaming on titles like this. We also observed video content at a range of frame rates, including 24 – 30fps Netflix content and 60fps YouTube content. For the lower framerate content there were no distinct weaknesses. A little bit of extra ‘powdery’ trailing in places for some of the transitions with dark shades, but nothing obnoxious. The 60fps content showed these weaknesses more clearly, although not as clearly as 100fps gaming. We didn’t really find the weaknesses particularly distracting when watching any of this movie content.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.

FreeSync – the technology and activating it

AMD FreeSync is a variable refresh rate technology, an AMD-specific alternative to Nvidia G-SYNC. Where possible, the monitor dynamically adjusts its refresh rate so that it matches the frame rate being outputted by the GPU. Both our responsiveness article and the G-SYNC article linked to explore the importance of these two elements being synchronised. At a basic level, a mismatch between the frame rate and refresh rate can cause stuttering (VSync on) or tearing and juddering (VSync off). FreeSync also boasts reduced latency compared to running with VSync enabled, in the variable frame rate environment in which it operates.

FreeSync requires a compatible AMD GPU such as the Radeon RX 580 used in our test system. There is a list of GPUs which support the technology here, with the expectation that future AMD GPUs will support the feature too. The monitor itself must support ‘VESA Adaptive-Sync’ for at least one of its display connectors, as this is the protocol that FreeSync uses. The 346B1C supports FreeSync via DP, USB-C (DP Alt Mode) and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. You need to make sure ‘Adaptive-Sync’ is set to ‘On’ in the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD. On the GPU driver side recent AMD drivers feature Radeon Settings, which makes activation of the technology very simple and something that usually occurs automatically. You should ensure the GPU driver is setup correctly to use FreeSync, so open ‘AMD Radeon Software’, click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the first slider, ‘Radeon FreeSync’ is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below.



The Philips supports a variable refresh rate range of 48 – 100Hz. That means that if the game is running between 48fps and 100fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 100fps, the monitor will stay at 100Hz and the GPU will respect your selection of ‘VSync on’ or ‘VSync off’ in the graphics driver. With ‘VSync on’ the frame rate will not be allowed to rise above 100fps, at which point VSync activates and imposes the usual associated latency penalty. With ‘VSync off’ the frame rate is free to climb as high as the GPU will output (potentially >100fps). AMD LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) is also supported by this model, which means that the refresh rate will stick to multiples of the frame rate where it falls below the 48Hz (48fps) floor of operation for FreeSync. If a game ran at 40fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 80Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. This feature is used regardless of VSync setting, so it’s only above the ceiling of operation where the VSync setting makes a difference.

To configure VSync, open ‘AMD Radeon Software’. Click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click ‘Graphics’. The setting is listed as ‘Wait for Vertical Refresh’. This configures it globally, but if you wish to configure it for individual games click ‘Game Graphics’ towards the top right. The default is ‘Off, unless application specifies’ which means that VSync will only be active if you enable it within the game itself, if there is such an option. Such an option does usually exist – it may be called ‘sync every frame’ or something along those lines rather than simply ‘VSync’. Most users will probably wish to enable VSync when using FreeSync to ensure that they don’t get any tearing. You’d therefore select either the third or fourth option in the list, shown in the image below. Above this dropdown list there’s a toggle for ‘Radeon Enhanced Sync’. This is an alternative to VSync which allows the frame rate to rise above the refresh rate (no VSync latency penalty) whilst potentially keeping the experience free from tearing or juddering. This requires that the frame rate comfortably exceeds the refresh rate, not just peaks slightly above it. We won’t be going into this in detail as it’s a GPU feature than a monitor feature.



Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set a few frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 97fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. If you go to ‘Setup’ – ‘Information’ in the OSD, you will see the refresh rate listed there change in real time alongside the frame rate of the content, if it’s within the variable refresh rate range of the display. Finally, it’s worth noting that FreeSync only removes stuttering or juddering related to mismatches between frame rate and refresh rate. It can’t compensate for other interruptions to smooth game play, for example network latency or insufficient system memory. Some game engines will also show stuttering (or ‘hitching’) for various other reasons which won’t be eliminated by the technology.

FreeSync – the experience

We ran various game titles on this monitor with FreeSync enabled and as usual the technology worked in much the same way across all game titles. Any issues identified on one specific title would suggest a game or GPU driver issue rather than a monitor issue. We’ll therefore simply focus on a single title for this section; Battlefield V. This title is good for testing the technology as it offers appropriate flexibility with its graphics settings to test the entire variable refresh rate range of the monitor. The Radeon RX 580 used in our test system struggled to maintain a constant 100fps, with frequent dips a bit below this even with fairly low graphics settings. Without FreeSync, even slight dips in frame rate would cause obvious (to us) tearing if VSync was disabled or stuttering if VSync was enabled. With FreeSync enabled and the refresh rate matching the frame rate, these interruptions were removed – very nice indeed for sensitive users like us. As frame rate dropped significantly and 100fps became a distant memory, there was a noticeable drop-off in connected feel and an increase in perceived blur. This is purely related to the drop in frame rate and isn’t something a variable refresh rate technology can address.

As frame rate dropped there was a bit of an increase in overshoot, for example some slightly more eye-catching ‘halo’ trailing. That’s because, unlike with G-SYNC monitors (with G-SYNC modules), the monitor doesn’t use variable overdrive. The pixel overdrive is just tuned for optimal performance at the maximum refresh rate (100Hz in this case), whereas ideally things would be re-tuned with reduced acceleration levels for lower refresh rates as well. This increase in overshoot was slight, though, and we don’t feel this was a major issue even towards the floor of operation (48fps). As frame rate dipped below that, the monitor employed LFC and stuck to a multiple of the frame rate with its refresh rate. There was a momentary stuttering or slight brief flickering when LFC activated or deactivated, but unless you’re frequently passing the boundary this shouldn’t really be an issue. The LFC technology worked very well to keep tearing and stuttering at bay.

Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (‘G-SYNC Compatible’)

As noted earlier, AMD FreeSync makes use of Adaptive-Sync technology on a compatible monitor. As of driver version 417.71, users with Nvidia GPUs (GTX 10 series and newer) and Windows 10 can also make use of this Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology. When a monitor is used in this way, it is something which Nvidia refers to as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’. Some models are specifically validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass specific quality checks such as the inclusion of effective variable overdrive. The make use of the technology, you need to connect the monitor up via DisplayPort. With the 346B1C you also need to make sure ‘Adaptive-Sync’ is set to ‘On’ in the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD. When you open up Nvidia Control Panel, you should then see ‘Set up G-SYNC’ listed in the ‘Display’ section. Ensure the ‘Enable G-SYNC, G-SYNC Compatible’ checkbox as well as ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is enabled as shown below. Press OK – the monitor should briefly flick off then on again and the technology should be active.



You will also see in the image above that it states: “Selected Display in not validated as G-SYNC Compatible.” This means Nvidia hasn’t specifically tested and validated the display, not that it doesn’t work. The technology did work and did its thing to remove tearing and stuttering from frame rate and refresh rate mismatches. Much as with FreeSync and with the same effective range of operation, plus an LFC-like behaviour below 48fps. We also observed flickering across a broad range or refresh rates, which wasn’t observed when using AMD FreeSync. At least not with such intensity or as widely. This was perhaps subtle enough for some to ignore at relatively high refresh rates, but below around 60fps and particularly with sudden fluctuations from a much higher frame rate to <60fps the flickering became quite intense. This won’t make the technology unusable for all, but users who are sensitive to flickering will probably find this quite bothersome.

Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but obviously you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than Radeon Settings to control this. The setting is found in ‘Manage 3D settings’ under ‘Vertical sync’, where the final option (‘Fast’) is equivalent to AMD’s ‘Enhanced Sync’ setting. You’ll also notice ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ listed under ‘Monitor Technology’ in this section, as shown below. Make sure this is selected (it should be if you’ve set everything up correctly in ‘Set up G-SYNC’). Finally, note again that you can go to ‘Setup’ – ‘Information’ in the OSD to see if the technology is working. If it is, the refresh rate displayed will change in real time according to the frame rate of the content, if it’s within the variable refresh rate range of the display.

The 34″ 3440 x 1440 curved ‘UltraWide’ experience

We’ve got an article dedicated to the 3440 x 1440 resolution and 21:9 and the experience that provides on the desktop, on games and for video content. This screen is the same size and resolution as the one in the article – 34” diagonal with a 3440 x 1440 resolution, yielding a pixel density of 109.68 PPI (Pixels Per Inch). This pixel density is similar to a 27” 2560 x 1440 (WQHD) model, whilst the vertical height of the screen is very similar as well. The larger horizontal screen space of this 21:9 screen and extra pixels give a nice boost in ‘desktop real-estate’ – with enhanced productivity being a key focus of this product. The Philips also has a moderately steep curve, at 1500R. This is more noticeable than on many curved monitors due to the radius of the curve and width of the screen. But it’s something we found comfortable and natural to use after a relatively short adjustment period (coming from a flat screen). Pictures and videos tend to exaggerate the effect of the curve and gives the impression of there being an obvious pincushion effect to the image. When you’re sitting at your desk using the monitor, this isn’t something you observe and after a period of adjustment the curve becomes the norm. It draws you in a bit to the image and brings the edges of the screen closer to your eyes. This brings with it potential viewing comfort benefits, too. Some users, such as graphic designers, may prefer the geometric predictability of a flat screen, but most users should embrace rather than fear the curve. The images below exaggerate the curve and makes it appear deeper and more obvious than it is in practice and are purely for illustrative purposes.

As mentioned earlier the curve draws you into the image a bit, with the 1500R curve and sheer width of the screen making this quite a noticeable but to us natural-feeling aspect of this screen. For gaming, it adds to the immersion but is something you soon forget is even there when absorbed into the game world. More noticeable is the 21:9 aspect ratio itself, which provides a significant Field of View (FOV) advantage in most titles. This is explored in our previously linked article on the topic. The article also explains that the screen-filling effect can work nicely for movie content. Provided you’re watching the right sort of content and you’ve got a browser extension or are using software which takes care of the zooming and cropping for you. As before the images below exaggerate the effect of the curve and they do not in any way indicate the image quality observed first-hand on the screen. They’re just there to show the screen in action on a few game titles, to fire up the imagination a bit.

Interpolation and upscaling

It may be necessary to run the monitor at a resolution below its native 3440 x 1440, perhaps for performance reasons or because you’re using a system (such as games console) that doesn’t support it. The monitor supports scaling functionality via any of its display inputs and at any selectable refresh rate, but offers more flexibility if using HDMI. To ensure the monitor rather than GPU is handling the scaling process, you need to make sure the GPU driver is set up correctly. For AMD GPU users the monitor will handle the scaling by default, when gaming at non-native resolutions. Nvidia users should open the Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. They should ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown below.

There are various scaling modes located in the ‘Picture’ – ‘Picture Format’ section of the OSD; ‘Wide screen’, ‘4:3’, ‘16:9’, ‘Movie 1’, ‘Movie 2’ and ‘1:1’. These were only accessible to us using HDMI rather than DP and are explored in the section of the OSD video below. One of the more useful settings is ‘Wide screen’, which will use an interpolation process but maintain the aspect ratio of the source resolution. And 1:1, which is a pixel mapping feature that will only use the pixels called for by the source resolution, without any distortion or loss of sharpness. Any unused pixels remain as a black border around the image. When using DP, where this menu was greyed out, different resolutions used different scaling methods. 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) used an interpolation process that stretched the image out across the entire screen. Whereas 2560 x 1440 used 1:1 pixel mapping, as a 27” diagonal image with black borders at the sides.

The interpolation process used by the monitor, for example to display 1920 x 1080 using the default ‘Wide Screen’ setting, is one of the better interpolation processes we’ve come across. The image appears somewhat softer than viewing the resolution natively on a 27” screen, particularly when observing more slender edges. The textures aren’t quite as crisp. But the softening is by no means extreme, an effective sharpening filter is used and if you’re sitting back a bit from the monitor it appears fairly sharp and detailed really. The 2560 x 1080 resolution uses a similar interpolation process, but because it has a 21:9 aspect ratio the full screen space is used without any black bars.

As usual, if you’re running the monitor at 3840 x 2160 and viewing 1920 x 1080 content (for example a video over the internet or a Blu-ray, using movie software) then it is the GPU and software that handles the upscaling. That’s got nothing to do with the monitor itself – there is a very small amount of softening to the image compared to viewing such content on a native Full HD monitor, but it’s slight and shouldn’t bother most users.

Video review

The video below shows the monitor in action. The camera, processing done and your own screen all affect the output – so it doesn’t accurately represent what you’d see when viewing the monitor in person. It still provides useful visual demonstrations and explanations which help reinforce some of the key points raised in the written piece.

Timestamps:
Features & Aesthetics
Contrast
Colour reproduction
Responsiveness

Conclusion

The 3440 x 1440 resolution and 21:9 aspect ratio has plenty to offer for both work and play. The Philips 346B1C is marketed as a ‘productivity monitor’, so more firmly focused on the former – although its specifications may prove enticing for the latter, too. The generous screen width and pixel count plus decent pixel density delivered a rich working experience. It also delivered an engrossing movie watching and gaming experience, for a bit of procrastination on the side. The monitor was solidly built with good ergonomic flexibility, plus some nice additional features such as USB-C and a ‘PowerSensor’ which proved surprisingly useful. The OSD included the usual suite of settings we’ve come accustomed to from Philips, including various gamma and colour temperature modes that many other manufacturers overlook. Although the gamma didn’t need adjustment on our unit, it’s a nice flexibility to have – and the ‘5000K’ colour temperature setting proved useful as a nicely balanced Low Blue Light (LBL) setting. The curve was in our view a nice addition, one which makes sense on a model as wide as this. It was easy to adjust to, draws you into the experience a bit more in a natural way and isn’t something users should be afraid of.

The main strength of any VA panel is contrast. Static contrast was relatively strong here, delivering superior depth and atmosphere compared to other LCD panel types. It wasn’t as high as we’ve seen from some VA models, though, and fell a bit short of the specifications. Meanwhile, the light matte screen surface kept lighter content looking relatively smooth, free from strong graininess. There was a bit of ‘VA glow’, but this was much less obtrusive from a normal viewing position than ‘IPS glow’. There was also some ‘black crush’, although about as little as we’ve seen from a VA panel. The colour and gamma consistency was as good as we’ve seen from the panel type, falling short of IPS-type panels but clearly ahead of TN panels and also some VA models. The monitor also provided quite vibrant colour output, with a generous but not extreme colour gamut that extended comfortably beyond sRGB. An sRGB emulation mode was included, although this cut down on the gamut too heavily (significant sRGB undercoverage) and blocked off brightness control.

Whilst clearly not designed as a gaming monitor, the inclusion of a 100Hz refresh rate proved useful for a bit of play on the side. This reduced perceived blur levels compared to lower refresh rates such as 60Hz and also improved the ‘connected feel’. Input lag was reasonably low, too, so won’t impede the experience for most users. Adaptive-Sync was also supported and worked well with AMD FreeSync. It also ‘worked’ with Nvidia’s ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’, although there was widespread flickering there that could bother some users. There were some definite weaknesses in terms of pixel responses. Whilst some were fast enough for a reasonable 100Hz experience, there were some instances of ‘heavy powdery’ and ‘smeary’ trailing. All VA models struggle to some extent with certain transitions, with some performing better than others. This was a little weaker than some of the other VA UltraWides we’ve tested, such as the ASUS MX34VQ, it was by no means poor. Most users should find it just fine for a bit of gaming on the side. Looking at the complete package here, there’s quite a lot to like about this monitor. It’s a feature-rich product with decent all-round performance, at a reasonable price.

The bottom line; a solidly built and feature-rich monitor offering an immersive UltraWide experience, more for work than play.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.