Skip to main content

Monoprice Zero-G 35-Inch Gaming Monitor Review: A Curved Ultra-Wide Bargain

At this price, 21:9 gaming doesn't get much better.

(Image: © Monoprice)

With curved ultra-wide monitors high on many gamer’s wish lists, the only obstacle is price. Though they’ve come down a bit since first appearing on the market, you’d usually have to shell out at least $600 or more for a 35-inch QHD screen like the Zero-G 35. Monoprice has certainly shaken things up with a $410 asking price and though some less-important features have been left out, everything you need for a satisfying gaming experience is there.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

You won’t get a fancy adjustable stand, though the included one is very solid. And there are no speakers or USB ports. The overdrive is a bit weak, and there is no backlight strobe. But with a reliable 100Hz refresh rate, FreeSync (and even unofficial G-Sync support), accurate color with calibration and excellent contrast, games will display with rich detail and vibrant color. The image competes favorably with all but the most expensive premium screens.

Gaming monitors come in all shapes and sizes, but once you’ve experienced a 34 or 35-inch ultra-wide, it’s hard to go back to 16:9. If your budget hasn’t allowed for a curved 21:9 screen in the past, the Monoprice Zero-G 35 might be inexpensive enough to warrant an upgrade. Though it has a relatively slim feature list, its price/performance ratio is high. This is well worth considering for value-conscious shoppers. 

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: All Monitor Content

  • cryoburner
    If it's zero-g, why does it need a stand? <_<

    Are a lack of speakers really a con though? The speakers included in monitors are usually pretty bad. If you want speakers of that quality, you can probably find a set for $10 somewhere. Most gamers will likely be using either a headset or better speakers anyway.

    Perhaps more worth noting would be that the limited FreeSync range means you won't get LFC to keep adaptive sync working when framerates dip below 48 fps. And while you might consider the resolution to be low enough to still get decent performance on "mid-priced" graphics cards, we're still talking about 2.4x the resolution of 1080p here, or nearly 35% more pixels than 1440p, so even with a $400 graphics card, performance is bound to dip into that range at times in some of the most demanding games with the settings turned up.
    Reply
  • DookieDraws
    Thanks for the review! Researching for a new monitor, and these reviews are helpful. Would love to see you review the AOC CU34G2X monitor soon. I guess you can call it a budget monitor, but it does have some pretty nice looking specs.
    Reply
  • mrv_co
    cryoburner said:
    If it's zero-g, why does it need a stand? <_<

    Are a lack of speakers really a con though? The speakers included in monitors are usually pretty bad. If you want speakers of that quality, you can probably find a set for $10 somewhere. Most gamers will likely be using either a headset or better speakers anyway.

    Perhaps more worth noting would be that the limited FreeSync range means you won't get LFC to keep adaptive sync working when framerates dip below 48 fps. And while you might consider the resolution to be low enough to still get decent performance on "mid-priced" graphics cards, we're still talking about 2.4x the resolution of 1080p here, or nearly 35% more pixels than 1440p, so even with a $400 graphics card, performance is bound to dip into that range at times in some of the most demanding games with the settings turned up.

    Yep, I consider no built-in speakers a feature.
    Reply
  • drivinfast247
    Dang! At that price I'll probably pick one up to hold me off till a few of the newly announced monitors at CES actually release.
    Reply