Acer XB270HAbprz 27 inch Gaming Monitor Has G-sync

Lowice

2014-08-26 14:02

Don't get this...Does it have G-sync or does it only support the G-sync modul?? Acer is to lauch a 27 inch Gaming Monitor with G-sync. The XB270HAbprz (blimey that name!). It uses a 1920 x 1080 panel that has a fast 1ms G2G response time and 144 Hz refresh rate support. Importantly this screen also supports NVIDIA's G-sync module.

#4899891

Netherwind

2014-08-26 15:10

Don't buy this. 1080p on a 27 inch monitor can't be pretty.

#4899893

War child

2014-08-26 15:12

Does a non Gsync version of this exist? perhaps that it what they mean by the ability to support the module. Much like Asus screen which current owners can upgrade to gsync.

#4899914

TheDeeGee

2014-08-26 15:39

Lego Block Pixels ?

#4899927

ElementalDragon

2014-08-26 15:55

Don't buy this. 1080p on a 27 inch monitor can't be pretty.

0.o i'm using a 27" 1080p monitor (Asus VE278Q), and it looks just fine.

Someone make a 1080p IPS Gsync already damnit! Elimination of screen tearing is much more of a benefit at 60fps than at 120+fps.

Probably won't be done. Why? Because i'm pretty sure the vast majority of gamers would prefer a higher refresh rate and faster response time over better color reproduction and lower refresh rates/response times.

#4900407

ElementalDragon

2014-08-27 05:03

I can't imagine there being no price hike on Adaptive Sync/FreeSync monitors as well. Kinda like one article that i just recently read mentions:

There are some associated hardware requirements, but the additional cost should be minimal, according to Huddy, who told us he'd be surprised if FreeSync compatibility added more than $10-20 to a display's bill of materials. Even taking additional validation costs into consideration, monitor makers should be able to support adaptive refresh rates fairly cheaply. They're still free to charge whatever premium they want, though.

http://techreport.com/news/26919/freesync-monitors-will-sample-next-month-start-selling-next-year And when they say that the guy AT AMD expects entry-level models to start out at 24hz.... yea.... good luck with manufacturers not running away with prices. As for what i said about what gamers would prefer... i didn't mean it the way you implied. Yes, if someone has the money, they're going to go for the best monitor they can get.... that being 120-144hz and probably with G-Sync. If that's out of their budget, the next thing they'd probably consider would be dropping G-Sync, and looking for a high refresh rate, with potentially a smaller display size. If that's still out of their budget, 60hz would be the next step down, and they'd then probably look more towards the response time.... which we all know IPS isn't really the king of. I'm just saying that color reproduction isn't really at the top of the list of requirements of gamers looking for a high-end monitor.... and display manufacturers know that.

#4900539

Netherwind

2014-08-27 08:55

0.o i'm using a 27" 1080p monitor (Asus VE278Q), and it looks just fine.

Why not? I hope you don't think you can see pixels at 1080p.. As I type this I am on a 1080p 42 inch screen and its beautiful for gaming.

I'm on another forum where most users seem to agree upon that 1080p is best on up to 24 inch. But I guess we're all different. I checked out a 27 inch 1080p monitor a month ago and found the image to be too blocky.

#4900634

RealNC

2014-08-27 12:00

The article forgot to mention one important factor: Like the ASUS ROG SWIFT monitor, this Acer monitor has an 8-bit TN panel as opposed to other TN monitors who only have 6-bit panels with dithering.

#4901122

ElementalDragon

2014-08-28 03:08

Actually, well we dont know for prices, time will tell what brand will do, but monitor prices will not forcibly be drive by this, i dont know if you have seen, but prices are going down for non 4k monitors and even 4K monitors are now enter the market at the 27" 1440p price, you cant forcibly add a tons of money for one feature, specially if it cost nearly nothing, because your direct competitor will get all the latency to beat you on price with same or more features...

True... there are more affordable 4k monitors now. But you also have to look at something else. I've yet to see a reasonably priced 4K monitor that can actually DO 4K at 60hz. Every one i've seen, in the budget end of the spectrum, uses a panel that's capable of hitting that 4K resolution, but at only 30hz.... which is kind of a buzzkill for the vast majority of people. Which could turn into exactly what the dude at AMD said.... starting out with monitors supporting FreeSync, quite possibly at a decent price, but also quite possibly with a sub-60hz refresh rate to make up for "costs" imposed by the manufacturer.

I'm on another forum where most users seem to agree upon that 1080p is best on up to 24 inch. But I guess we're all different. I checked out a 27 inch 1080p monitor a month ago and found the image to be too blocky.

Well... of course the best screen size for any given resolution would be the lowest screen size that a specific resolution comes in. That results in a higher PPI count. As for "checking out" a 27" 1080p monitor.... where did you do so? I never trust display quality at stores and such, ESPECIALLY if it's like Best Buy with their "Wall-o-Monitors" which you know damn well are probably all connected to the same system or small group of systems or something along those lines. Nothing blocky at all with my monitor.

#4901127

CPC_RedDawn

2014-08-28 03:20

I checked out a 27 inch 1080p monitor a month ago and found the image to be too blocky.

Your sir, must have some alien-like eye sight to see "blocky" images on a 27" 1080p screen. I use a 22" 1080p screen and it looks perfect. I also go round my friends house who has a 55" 1080p 3D panasonic plasma and that also looks gorgeous. Not quite sure what you have been looking at, you sure you wasn't checking out "HD READY" monitors that are actually 1080i or 720p lol :P

#4901196

southamptonfc

2014-08-28 07:55

Your sir, must have some alien-like eye sight to see "blocky" images on a 27" 1080p screen. I use a 22" 1080p screen and it looks perfect. I also go round my friends house who has a 55" 1080p 3D panasonic plasma and that also looks gorgeous. Not quite sure what you have been looking at, you sure you wasn't checking out "HD READY" monitors that are actually 1080i or 720p lol :P

It sounds like you might need an eye test!

#4901259

Aura89

2014-08-28 10:39

Another 1080p monitor? Would of better being at least 2k.

...why do people keep stating 2K, 2K means nothing, or everything, and anything, depending on what you mean by 2K For instance, i could read your post as saying "Another 1080p monitor? Would of better being at least 1080p." since 2K can refer to 1080p.... 2K isn't a resolution, but a definition of a realm of resolutions. At least with 4K and monitors everyone knows it means 3840x2160, but in regards to 2K, it's not marketed as 2K. What you likely mean is 1440p, which is marketed as 1440p...

I use a 22" 1080p screen and it looks perfect. I also go round my friends house who has a 55" 1080p 3D panasonic plasma and that also looks gorgeous.

It sounds like you might need an eye test!

I agree...a 55" 1080p tv is not a good resolution for a TV, 4K resolution starts really showing at 55" and above, but even as far down as 46. And as a monitor? 1080p is HORRIBLE for a 55", 27" 1080p monitor is cutting it close, 32" 1080p is pretty much as far as it can be taken before it's no longer suitable for a monitor at all. Note: i did not say not suitable as a TV, i said not suitable for a monitor, of which you are much, much closer to.

#4940668

Neo Cyrus

2014-10-19 04:12

Lego Block Pixels ?

It's not that bad from a distance, from close up where it's typically used it's not that bad either if you don't know what a 1440p 27" looks like. If you do know however, then it's horrible.

#4940695

Aura89

2014-10-19 07:03

Delete

#4940876

Xendance

2014-10-19 16:58

Why not? I hope you don't think you can see pixels at 1080p.. As I type this I am on a 1080p 42 inch screen and its beautiful for gaming.

You better see an optometrist then 😉

#4941051

Corrupt^

2014-10-19 23:54

I love how people discuss pixel density on a 27 inch monitor, while the majority of competitive gamers are often even running 720p on those monitors... 120 Hz, no vsync, locked framerate steady as hell, ... Pixel skipping near the crosshair is also less likely on a lower res. Hell some old skool quakers/cs players are still runnin 800x600 these days. Call me crazy, but I would love to have an IPS with amazing colors as my Desktop monitor and a 120 Hz... with a native resolution of 1280x720 for gaming. I'm crazy I know 🙂

#4941058

rflair

Moderator

2014-10-20 00:19

The difference from 1080p to 1440p on a 27" display is easily noticeable. It all comes down to pixel density and viewing distance, and 27" at a normal viewing distance the pixels on a 1080p display are clearly visible.

#4941108

ElementalDragon

2014-10-20 04:31

Maybe if you're looking at, say, the dotted line between your post and where it says you edited your post.... or if you're looking at something that has a designated corner.... but to say you can see the pixels from a normal sitting distance on a 27" 1080p screen is just as bad as people saying they can SEE the difference between like 90hz and 120hz.

#4941134

fantaskarsef

2014-10-20 07:46

I love how people discuss pixel density on a 27 inch monitor, while the majority of competitive gamers are often even running 720p on those monitors... 120 Hz, no vsync, locked framerate steady as hell, ... Pixel skipping near the crosshair is also less likely on a lower res. Hell some old skool quakers/cs players are still runnin 800x600 these days. Call me crazy, but I would love to have an IPS with amazing colors as my Desktop monitor and a 120 Hz... with a native resolution of 1280x720 for gaming. I'm crazy I know 🙂

Yes you are... But yes, reminds me of the old rocket arena days... where 800x600 was still top of the notch for fast machines only. Still got jumping on the right mouse button as a standard fps configuration 😀

#4941401

rflair

Moderator

2014-10-20 17:28

Maybe if you're looking at, say, the dotted line between your post and where it says you edited your post.... or if you're looking at something that has a designated corner.... but to say you can see the pixels from a normal sitting distance on a 27" 1080p screen is just as bad as people saying they can SEE the difference between like 90hz and 120hz.

I know what I can and can't see. Maybe you have poor vision, I really don't know. I am 100% sure anyone else who has had both or worked with both will tell you the same, it is easily noticeable; poor vision aside.