AOC C4008VU8 UHD Monitor Review

Viewing Angles, Uniformity, Response & Lag

Viewing Angles

AOC mentions wide viewing angles in its marketing for the C4008VU8, but as we’ve learned from experience, MVA is a little deficient in that area. While far better than any TN screen, IPS still offers the best off-axis quality with the AHVA variant at the top of the heap. Our sample shows a red shift to the sides along with an obvious haziness. It’s much the same from the top down. Of course, with a screen this large, it’ll be hard to sit 45° away from the center.

Screen Uniformity

To learn how we measure screen uniformity, please click here.

The C4008VU8 has a uniformity compensation mode, but it’s clearly unnecessary considering our test results. It has a minimal effect on black levels, showing a rise in the black field measurement. Most of the compensation happens in brighter areas of the screen where output is cut by almost 50%. Our only concern is for color uniformity which is a little below average. We could see a slight green tint in the upper-right zone which skewed our result to the negative.

Pixel Response & Input Lag

Please click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.

Screen response and input lag are about average for the class. 60Hz monitors like this are just begging for FreeSync which has a greater impact at low framerates. Until more systems include DisplayPort 1.3, we won’t be seeing refresh rates above that at Ultra HD resolution. While we’re waiting, some sort of adaptive sync would be helpful. However, the C4008VU8 is a fine monitor for casual gaming. Its jumbo size and gentle curve enhance the feeling of immersion in pretty much any first-person title we can think of.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: Best Professional Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: How To Choose A Monitor

MORE: All Monitor Content

This thread is closed for comments
23 comments
    Your comment
  • RobertGru
    Why not just buy an LG 43" 4K TV for $400.
  • venelin.mihaylov
    PWM?
  • sargentchimera
    I have a 43in Sony Bravia X800D TV I bought for ~$650, I bought it specifically for its size and HDR capability. If this had been out 8 months ago I think I would of bought it instead. The review mentioned not all HDR TVs fully benefit from their HDR, I wonder if mine is in that boat... I do notice a difference with it on but perhaps the effect is not as strong as it could be. I wonder if the picture would be better on this monitor.
  • JonDol
    When I saw the title I hoped for a second that the first 4K monitor that is worth the money has arrived. Too bad it isn't it.
  • Zerstorer1
    40" Samsung KU6300 HDR 4K 4:4:4 60 fps gaming for 399. Been using it for year as my personal desktop screen.
  • Zerstorer1
    I've been using a Samsung KU6300 for year now. Got it for 399. Heal of deal. Supports 4:4:4 and HDR 60 fps at 4k gaming.
  • hannibal
    Why so? This monitor is very well worth of its money!
    It is big and picture quality is nice!
    Even 27" 4K monitors cost almost 600-1000$
    And if it is any better... it is even more expensive.

    Hopefully we will get HDR and freesync version below 1500$ sooner than later. That would be bargain!
  • Brian_R170
    I bought a Samsung UN40KU6290 40-inch 4K TV last November from Costco for $289 to use as a monitor for my gaming system. There are usually a lot of trade-offs when using a TV as a monitor, and I agree that using a purpose-built computer monitor should always be better. Still, if you can find a TV that meets your own minimum requirements, you can save a LOT of money.
  • Brian_R170
    Zerstorer1, +1 on the KU6300. Reviews said it's the same as my KU6290 but has a fancy remote. The only thing I miss that a purpose-built computer monitor would have is auto-sensing the inputs to automatically power-on from standby. The KU will automatically go to standby after it senses all inputs are lost for a few minutes, but it doesn't power-on automatically.
  • Max_x2
    I'm wondering in the warm whites are often a problem with AOC. I returned one couple years because of that, and, you know, it kinda left a bad aftertaste.
  • AnimeMania
    I was hoping you would have included a close-up photo of the connection ports on the back, they look interesting.
  • WINTERLORD
    a 800$ monitor without HDR yea right
  • ahnilated
    I was tempted until I saw "curved". I am so sick of the curved crap.
  • irtehyar
    Please let curved finish dying already. :(
  • photonboy
    RobertGru,
    Why not 4K HDTV? They literally answer that question in the first paragraph.

    I don't think you can select resolutions like 2560x1440 either so it can be problematic for gaming.
  • bksk1932
    Hi ..Buy a Sony Bravo TV like $3.5k in 2007 ...print this article and then eat it....
    or rewrite it....
  • 10tacle
    Decent price for such a large 4K 10-bit monitor, but no HDR support and no Freesync is a deal killer. I'd have been willing to pay $200 more for HDR10 and Freesync support. Like many, I have an Xbox One X on pre-order and am in the market for a 4K HDR monitor to take advantage of it. Looking to replace the 32" 1080p desktop HDTV used for my PS4. I do not game in my living room where my 4K HDR10 TV is.
  • hannibal
    4K tv is not a monitor, even you can use it like monitor. There is big difference in there...
  • rwinches
    If you buy a large expensive monitor like this you are going to use a VESA mount that gives wide range of adjustment and stability.
    If there is no 'perfect monitor' then there is no point in the mention.
    Like their excellent 144Hz 1080p 24" monitor at $200 that they followed up with a same spec Freesync monitor for $220-$250 street (both favorably reviewed by Toms) I believe AOC will offer an improved version of this 4K for a reasonable price.
    Wow, what a weak list of cons and no recommendation?
    No gaming impressions? Is it only good for productivity SW?
    No pic of a bunch of apps open on the screen or a full screen spreadsheet or split screen?
  • zodiacfml
    The introduction is quite misleading leading me to think that this goes beyond 60Hz. This is no different from Philips' 40inch and above 4K monitors.
  • 10tacle
    191196 said:
    The introduction is quite misleading leading me to think that this goes beyond 60Hz. This is no different from Philips' 40inch and above 4K monitors.


    If you are referring to this opening paragraph comment:

    Quote:
    It’s not too hard to find a 40” or larger Ultra HD TV at the local wholesale club for less than $1000. But going this route can have a few downsides. First off, you won’t find a consumer TV with DisplayPort. And more importantly, most sets won’t accept signals above 60Hz, even if they refresh at a higher rate.


    They are referring to the extremely limited availability of 4K HDTVs <$1K with >60Hz refresh rate capability, and this one is no exception. That's the way I read it initially, but I now see where it can be interpreted that this set does run higher than 60Hz and is an ambiguous statement.
  • Zerstorer1
    Well that is debatable to a degree. My Samsung KU6300 has an option to specify that a PC card is hook up to it. Once it has done that, the 4:4:4 text mode kicks in for super crisp text and also enables full HDR for vivid deep color as well as 60 FPS / refresh at 3840x2160. My 1080 TI runs all my games at 4K at 60 FPS. Now obviously its capped at 60 FPS, but for $400 at a 40" screen with HDR. Plus I get to use 4K Netflix, 4K Hulu, 4k Amazon with multiple additional inputs. Kinda sinks the battle ship of these $1000+ dollar 28"-32" monitors they are hustling in my opinion. Now get this I have been reading that Samsung is bringing free-sync to their TV line up at the end of the year, although that's only good for AMD cards. So might switch to Vega next year and get another $400-500 Samsung that will have access to 144 refresh, plus all the previous mentioned goodies. Just my 2 cents.
  • photonboy
    2536519 said:
    Hi ..Buy a Sony Bravo TV like $3.5k in 2007 ...print this article and then eat it.... or rewrite it....


    I bought a Sony Bravia 32", 768p HDTV probably about 2007 and it's still going strong. Paid $3,500 (CDN) for the 768p as it was 5K for the 1080p version. Still pretty good picture.

    In fact, it has way better speakers than any HDTV today from what I can see (probably not much proportionate cost to use good speakers when the TV was so expensive).