Official Acer [XB270HU] 27" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync IPS ULMB Monitor Thread

m51s said:
I have one question left - WTF LG have been doing all this time (10+ years). Basically no progress with IPS speed at all! AU Optronics started making their IPS (AHVA) a couple of years ago and already they have the fastest IPS ever. Shame on you LG.
Click to expand...

Demand for responsive IPS panels has been steadily growing, but remains something of a niche market. Throughout the past 10+ years, LG has been raking in quite a decent amount from its conventional IPS tech.

As for the future...well, LG is one of the OLED panel manufacturers :)
 
Richard Jones said:
@kalston: Sorry I don't get it, they say they fed a 1080p source signal to the monitor and it was able to display it stretched.
That doesn't mean stretched by the GPU nor the OS.
Click to expand...

Well I don't know for sure but I'm able to get my UEFI bios to display on my Swift which doesn''t have a scaler either. Looks ugly, stretched, and with black bars on top of that. Not sure how that works exactly.

Anyway this is a PC display to be used with a modern nvidia GPU, nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry that it's not what you're looking for but it is what it is, a great display but not perfect and not suitable for everyone and all needs.
 
mope54 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AU_Optronics


Notice the date stamp on this page you cited is 2011
Click to expand...

Ok, so that says
AUO manufactures TFT panels for companies including Samsung, Sony, NEC, Lenovo, Panasonic, LG, Dell, Apple, Viewsonic, Acer, Toshiba.[citation needed]
Click to expand...

No citation. It also doesn't say what proportion of LG's panels are made by AU Optronics, not even if said panels are IPS panels or something else.

Got something we can actually verify?
 
I guess one could argue that they still manufacture IPS panels but one would wonder why when AUO makes better technology and sells them to LG and LG doesn't have to spend money manufacturing old technology. An unknown proportion? I'm going to go out on a crazy limb here and assume that AUO provides as many panels as LG wants/needs.

What other kinds of panels does AU Optronics manufacture? They have TN and IPS. Whichever ones LG wants those are the ones they will be willing to provide you can be sure of that.
 
LG.Display make most of the IPS variant panels still, but Samsung (PLS) and AUO (AHVA) have been ramping up over the last couple of years. Display manufacturers use a mixture of different manufacturers panels. LG (as a monitor manuf) tend to stick with LG.Display IPS, BenQ tend to stick with AUO AHVA and Samsung tend to stick with Samsung PLS due to their affiliations with one another. not always, but more often than not.

AUO also manufacture TN Film and AMVA (VA version) and have been making those for many years. IT's only AHVA (IPS version) which is relatively new

wouldn't surprise me to see faster LG.Display IPS / Samsung PLS panels with 144HZ at some point as they will want to keep up. looks like AUO got there first though!
 
Let's not get too caught up in semantics

The person I was responding to was asking what LG had been doing for the past 10 years

LG isn't bothering with IPS technology anymore because it's been surpassed. They are focusing on OLEDs and flexible displays. Sure, they may make bog standard IPS panels for OEM's but it's not like they're spending money to make IPS better when they can simply outsource that to AUO.

You think they're buying TN panels from AUO but they're not going to just outsource AHVA panels from them, too? That doesn't make much sense.
 
kalston said:
Well I don't know for sure but I'm able to get my UEFI bios to display on my Swift which doesn''t have a scaler either. Looks ugly, stretched, and with black bars on top of that. Not sure how that works exactly.

Anyway this is a PC display to be used with a modern nvidia GPU, nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry that it's not what you're looking for but it is what it is, a great display but not perfect and not suitable for everyone and all needs.
Click to expand...

This is too confusing, I'll ask tftcentral directly.

About that point of being "a PC display to be used with a modern nvidia GPU, nothing more" I really don't get where people get that idea.

There is no such thing as a display made exclusively for one purpose, there are displays with more or less features and better or worse performance, that's all.

If it's able to display 1080p@60 stretched, why not try and use it for that too if it only requires an adapter ?
This would be very convenient an add greatly to its practical value.

Well, I think there's no point in arguing on [H], it's too much of a pc-gaming-only community who doesn't even want to hear about anything else if it hurts the religion.

If I manage to get a confirmation about that particular point I won't bother sharing since no one cares. :p

Tschüß ;)
 
They're saying that because this is being billed primarily as a G-Sync monitor.

That said, the reviewer took special note of the fact that this monitor was more compatible with AMD cards specifically to make the point that anyone looking for a low refresh rate (and IPS) would be served better than a Swift that doesn't work well with all AMD cards at 120+ hz
 
mope54 said:
Let's not get too caught up in semantics

The person I was responding to was asking what LG had been doing for the past 10 years

LG isn't bothering with IPS technology anymore because it's been surpassed. They are focusing on OLEDs and flexible displays. Sure, they may make bog standard IPS panels for OEM's but it's not like they're spending money to make IPS better when they can simply outsource that to AUO.

You think they're buying TN panels from AUO but they're not going to just outsource AHVA panels from them, too? That doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

I'm yet to see any solid evidence that AU Optronics makes any panels for LG. A sentence on Wikipedia without a source is gives me literally 0 confidence. There are a few scattered statements on Google suggesting that AU Optronics once made 'some' panels for LG, but that this was literally years ago.
 
Hmm, good point. I'm now convinced that if AUO made *some* panels for LG years ago they are making even less now...especially given the fact that they sued LG for patent infringement five years ago and since came out with a superior technology.

LG is probably just cranking their own old-tech, patent infringing panels out left and right by now.
 
The 2 LG panels I've owned before my Swift had in fact AUO panels. TN (2009) & IPS (2012). But getting completely off-topic now... Can we go back to how awesome this monitor is regardless of who made it?

I'm just a bit worried about panel lottery and stuff, reviewers generally get cherry picked units as we know all too well by now.
 
Why is the pixel response rate dependent upon the frames per second?
Is that normal for an IPS panel?
 
mope54 said:
Hmm, good point. I'm now convinced that if AUO made *some* panels for LG years ago they are making even less now...especially given the fact that they sued LG for patent infringement five years ago and since came out with a superior technology.

LG is probably just cranking their own old-tech, patent infringing panels out left and right by now.
Click to expand...

Panels supplied by AUO to LG don't even have to be IPS - they might be TN screens. I'm not sure if LG has their own TN factories.
 
mope54 said:
Why is the pixel response rate dependent upon the frames per second?
Is that normal for an IPS panel?
Click to expand...

It's a result of Overdrive. As refresh rate up, Overdrive becomes more 'aggressive' even within the same 'normal' or 'extreme' setting:

It seems that the refresh rate has an impact on the overdrive impulse, pushing the response times down as you increase the refresh rate. This is more clear in the following section where we test the 'Extreme' OD setting, but you can see a very minor amount of overshoot starts to appear in the 'Normal' mode when you reach 144Hz.
Click to expand...
 
Shame no TW poloarizer and semi glossy coating but looks very good other than that..
 
Last edited:
mope54 said:
one potential problem is that in order to get the best pixel response rate you *have* to keep it at 144hz.

and even then it's more than twice as slow as the swift :(

but it certainly does put a fight up against the swift. I'm not convinced it's a blow-out.
going to have to use them side by side...this beast better not cost $1200 bucks.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with keeping it at 144 Hz?

If you look at their actual tests:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/pixperan/acer_xb270hu.jpg
vs
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/pixperan/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.jpg

The Acer does just as well if not better than the Swift in motion clarity/ghosting.

Quote: All things considered we felt that the Acer XB270HU performed the best in these specific tests. The response times were slightly slower than the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q and BenQ XL2720Z, but the benefit of that was that there was no overshoot on the Acer, whereas the others showed some moderate levels. You get the not-to-be-underestimated benefits of the IPS-type panel as well from the Acer, with wider viewing angles and a more stable image appearance compared with the TN Film models. Overall a very impressive performance from the XB270HU.

Black Octagon said:
Vega: Do you still have your Eizo Foris? If so, I'd love to see how that monitor's Turbo240 function looks compared to this Acer with ULMB @ 100Hz. The brightness difference will be huge, I imagine, but the blur reduction itself is something I'm having a harder time guessing.
Click to expand...

Yes, I still have my 3x1 portrait Eizo setup. The 100 pulse width setting on the Acer is 2.5ms, or slightly longer than the Eizo's fixed 2.2ms. The Eizo should have a slight edge in motion clarity. The biggest difference though is the Eizo while strobing can get WAY brighter than these ULMB displays. Not sure if Eizo just used better/stronger LED's or what.

So basically Eizo:
+Best strobing backlight display as it can stay bright while maintaining a fairly good 2.2ms MPRT.
+120 Hz Strobing
+VA Contrast is incredible
+VA Black depth amazing
+Semi-gloss AR
+Works equally well with all GPU's
-Only 1080p
-Only 24"
-VA black crush
-Some edge contrast/focus issues
-High variation in quality control

Acer:
+IPS colors
+IPS viewing angles
+1440p
+Decent 27" size
+144 Hz G-Sync
-IPS glow
-Max 100Hz strobing
-Low strobing brightness
-Contrast is good for IPS, can't compete with VA
-Black depth is good for IPS, can't compete with VA
-Full matte film
-NVIDIA GPU only for it's G-Sync/ULMB features

I do think the Acer is a stronger buy than the Swift. TN on the Swift just erases a lot of pro's versus it's con's.
 
IPS is a massive improvement on the TN swift... simply because the viewing angles on TN are bad... even viewing a TN screen at a normal angle the colors change across the screen.
 
Vega said:
So basically Eizo:
+Best strobing backlight display as it can stay bright while maintaining a fairly good 2.2ms MPRT.
+120 Hz Strobing
+VA Contrast is incredible
+VA Black depth amazing
+Semi-gloss AR
+Works equally well with all GPU's
-Only 1080p
-Only 24"
-VA black crush
-Some edge contrast/focus issues
-High variation in quality control

Acer:
+IPS colors
+IPS viewing angles
+1440p
+Decent 27" size
+144 Hz G-Sync
-IPS glow
-Max 100Hz strobing
-Low strobing brightness
-Contrast is good for IPS, can't compete with VA
-Black depth is good for IPS, can't compete with VA
-Full matte film
-NVIDIA GPU only for it's G-Sync/ULMB features
Click to expand...

Agreed, though I believe the Acer also has better input lag measurements.

Glad to hear that you still have the Forises. This means that you can do a comparison with your Acer before (potentially) selling them :)
 
Nicholars said:
IPS is a massive improvement on the TN swift... simply because the viewing angles on TN are bad... even viewing a TN screen at a normal angle the colors change across the screen.
Click to expand...

I personally agree, though not everyone is as bothered by TN viewing angles as you or I. If looking to buy 3 screens instead of 1, the Acer is clearly better than the Asus.
 
Black Octagon said:
Agreed, though I believe the Acer also has better input lag measurements.

Glad to hear that you still have the Forises. This means that you can do a comparison with your Acer before (potentially) selling them :)
Click to expand...

Ah yes, I forgot the Acer pretty much has a perfect input lag score, and the viewing angles combined with smaller'ish bezels will also make it the best screen for multi-monitor setups.
 
Vega said:
Ah yes, I forgot the Acer pretty much has a perfect input lag score, and the viewing angles combined with smaller'ish bezels will also make it the best screen for multi-monitor setups.
Click to expand...

Lol, I can literally picture your mind ticking over, justifying this next purchase :)
 
Why do they have to price these screens so disgustingly high? £700 come on wtf who can actually afford that for a 27" AHVA screen. They would probably sell a lot more at about £500 but £700 you can buy a 4k TV or an entire mid range PC... Probably the Nvidia gshit ripoff, ah well maybe the Asus freesync version with this panel will be less disgustingly priced.
 
Last edited:
Nicholars said:
Why do they have to price these screens so disgustingly high? £700 come on wtf who can actually afford that for a 27" AHVA screen. They would probably sell a lot more at about £500 but £700 you can buy a 4k TV or an entire mid range PC... Probably the Nvidia gshit ripoff, ah well maybe the Asus freesync version with this panel will be less disgustingly priced.
Click to expand...

This isn't the kind of stuff they're looking to do volume on. I mean they could price this stuff at that point and get everybody on it, but what's the point of having a premium line then?
 
dmonkey said:
This isn't the kind of stuff they're looking to do volume on. I mean they could price this stuff at that point and get everybody on it, but what's the point of having a premium line then?
Click to expand...

I am just annoyed that's all because I want to buy one and need a new monitor NOW.. but cannot justify that sort of money on a 27" IPS screen. They could still make a lot of profit at about £500 probably. Especially as "Acer" is not exactly a premium brand asus or NEC etc. and the stand etc. does not look expensive... it seems a lot. Ah well at least this AHVA panel is looking good for more screens to come out using it in the future with similar response times etc. That response time is very good with no overshoot I did not expect it to be under about 7.5ms. Anyway when this monitor is not the only one available and there is more competition, prices will probably come down. Sorry that paragraph was barely english typed it fast lol.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a fair price for literally the best gaming monitor in the world. I expect MSRP to be $799 USD.
 
Vega said:
I think it's a fair price for literally the best gaming monitor in the world. I expect MSRP to be $799 USD.
Click to expand...

^^this

Acer will most likely be looking to square off with the Asus ROG Swift and take market share from the segment they are aiming for(Nvidia PC gamers). They can't do that if not comparatively priced.
 
...did tftcentral not measure the gamma curve at different refresh rates?
 
Vega said:
What's wrong with keeping it at 144 Hz?

If you look at their actual tests:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/pixperan/acer_xb270hu.jpg
vs
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/pixperan/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.jpg

The Acer does just as well if not better than the Swift in motion clarity/ghosting.
Click to expand...
Nothing "wrong" with it except that my rig can't handle that :(

But no, the Acer does not do "just as well if not better" than the Swift. That's a strange embellishment. Even at it's fastest it's still more than twice as slow as the Swift.

I'd call the Predator possibly tolerable but it's glossing over the refresh rate to say that it's comparable or better. There's nothing suggesting that it would be better not even sure where that is coming from.

Vega said:
I think it's a fair price for literally the best gaming monitor in the world. I expect MSRP to be $799 USD.
Click to expand...
I'm betting over $1000. Maybe even $1200. They have no reason to be lower. They could price it right alongside an Apple Thunderbolt display, for example.
 
Between a guaranteed glow-free *cough* Eizo CX271 @ $1,400 and the XB270HU, which is most overpriced ?

Even the LG 27MB85R seems overpriced to me now.

That 'fair' price for the XB270HU is still a lot though, same as a 50" Sony W800 set.
The latter is fantastic but a real slowpoke for gaming compared to the Acer of course.
 
There is a rather large gap in the market between standard gaming monitors, 1440p screens and these gaming screens....

Most 1080p monitors can be had for £150-£250, then a 1440p 27" IPS can be got for about £350-£450, then it is a big jump up to these "premium gaming" screens at about £700.
 
27" 1440p 60Hz screen costs around 500 euro.

200-250 euro premium for adaptive refresh rate, strobing and first fast 144Hz ips panel seem fair to me.
 
Richard Jones said:
Between a guaranteed glow-free *cough* Eizo CX271 @ $1,400 and the XB270HU, which is most overpriced ?

Even the LG 27MB85R seems overpriced to me now.

That 'fair' price for the XB270HU is still a lot though, same as a 50" Sony W800 set.
The latter is fantastic but a real slowpoke for gaming compared to the Acer of course.
Click to expand...

TV's are priced differently because they're volume products. If everybody was a hardcore PC gamer you can bet there'd be more and cheaper high-end gaming displays, but that's not the case.
 
mope54 said:
Nothing "wrong" with it except that my rig can't handle that :(

But no, the Acer does not do "just as well if not better" than the Swift. That's a strange embellishment. Even at it's fastest it's still more than twice as slow as the Swift.

I'd call the Predator possibly tolerable but it's glossing over the refresh rate to say that it's comparable or better. There's nothing suggesting that it would be better not even sure where that is coming from.
Click to expand...

First, you need to understand the article. The Acer has virtually zero over-shoot. The Swift has plenty of overshoot. This helps the Acer to appear just as clear if not clearer in motion.

In practice the Acer XB270HU performed best with the Overdrive setting on 'normal'. Motion blur was minimal and the moving image looked sharp and crisp. Motion felt very fast and fluid thanks to the 144Hz refresh rate, something which you can't really pick out with the camera. There was no overshoot detected at all which was equally as pleasing as the fast response times.

All things considered we felt that the Acer XB270HU performed the best in these specific tests. The response times were slightly slower than the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q and BenQ XL2720Z, but the benefit of that was that there was no overshoot on the Acer, whereas the others showed some moderate levels.

The fastest TN Film models like the Asus ROG Swift PG278Q might have had slightly faster pixel transitions by a few ms, but their overshoot was at moderate levels. We actually preferred the artefact-free fluidity of the panel here and response times were low enough to be able to cope with the high frame rates offered. As we've already mentioned, you also get the added benefits of the image quality offered from the IPS-type panel as compared with TN Film models.

Move over Asus ROG Swift PG278Q, in our opinion we've got a new king of gaming monitors!

There is more to motion clarity than just simple pixel transition speed. Overshoot makes a huge difference in blur, not to mention the Acer has far higher image quality than the Swift making things easier to see. And on top of that, the Acer has the better AR film. Better contrast ratio, better colors, better blacks, better viewing angles, lower input lag. The Acer is superior to the Swift.
 
I understand the article fine enough, thank you very much for your condescension.

As stated earlier, in order to get anywhere near what they're talking about you have to maintain the frames at a solid 144 fps. If you can do that then you don't need G-sync.

Look at my rig, I can't maintain 144fps when playing BF4 at 1440p so the Predator can't match the quality of the Swift for me.

(and btw, I'm referring to tftcentral's claim that the Predator's best refresh rate being 2-3x slower than the Swift's as "slightly" slower an embellishment, not your statements)
 
Last edited:
i don't think "response times" are relevant at all when there is overshoot. for instance a monitor which has 0ms response time and 3ms of overshoot will look way worse than a monitor with 4ms response time and no overshoot
 
flod said:
i don't think "response times" are relevant at all when there is overshoot. for instance a monitor which has 0ms response time and 3ms of overshoot will look way worse than a monitor with 4ms response time and no overshoot
Click to expand...
I don't know but the reviewer is really playing fast and loose with his verbiage.

When comparing the rate of 5.9 (predator) to 2.9 (swift) he calls the predator "slightly slower"

but when comparing the predator to itself, at 60 to 120 to 144, he calls the differences:
8.7 "on par with the best IPS", 6.3 "quite significant", and 5.9 "amazing" respectively, even though those deltas are smaller than between it and the swift.
 
I don't think we can discuss it accurately without some really deep knowledge of biology and how human eye operates.
 
mope54 said:
I understand the article fine enough, thank you very much for your condescension.

As stated earlier, in order to get anywhere near what they're talking about you have to maintain the frames at a solid 144 fps. If you can do that then you don't need G-sync.

Look at my rig, I can't maintain 144fps when playing BF4 at 1440p so the Predator can't match the quality of the Swift for me.

(and btw, I'm referring to tftcentral's claim that the Predator's best refresh rate being 2-3x slower than the Swift's as "slightly" slower an embellishment, not your statements)
Click to expand...

You are kidding yourself. I would as well if I just spent £700 on the rog swift tbh.
 
Nicholars said:
You are kidding yourself. I would as well if I just spent £700 on the rog swift tbh.
Click to expand...
LOL, wtf? who is spending that on an asus swift? :confused:

not even sure what you're quoting in that chunk that is remotely close to anyone fooling themselves anyway. if the thread is going to devolve into personal attacks this is going to get tiresome real quick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top