ACER PREDATOR CG437K monitor, better than ASUS?

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
370
It seems that this monitor might be the real winner if it has RGB subpixel array, can anybody confirm this?
Here’s the review, but I still can’t find info about that. It looks like it may be what we all wanted from the 43” ASUS monitor
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/acer-predator-cg437k-43-4k-hdr1000
It's BGR and it ain't anything special. I picked one up the other week and returned it a few days later. Somewhat better than the Asus, but only marginally. Text is still crap, even with the tweaks you can make, and it's never going to be equal to RGB. For gaming though, yeah, it's fine, but I don't think justifies its price tag given the issues it has. The typical VA flaws are evident. At half the price, it would be OK, but they're just asking way too much for this IMO, hence why I returned it. Best hold out for the LG 48" OLED... may be cheaper than this and will absolutely wipe the floor with it.
 

dgz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
5,838
HDMI 2.1 displays later on this year will completely obsolete this monitor at much lower prices.
You forgot to add "hopefully". I agree with your sentiment, though. Now is a terrible time for buying a good monitor/tv.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
30
Because there isn't one... not at the price it's at anyway.... were it half that, there would be a strong argument.
Ok, except maybe the size, I still think 40” is perfect, 43” is good for pc gaming too, but 48” I would like to see if I could handle it without moving my head too much, and the DPI, I don’t know if it may be too low
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,688
LG 48" gang says 'buying old smearfest crap is a waste of money at this point'.

Glad to see the rehashed, lazy, cheap-ass monitor pushers thrown into the marsh at this point. Good riddance.

I've not upgraded since 2011 because everything has been a huge compromise. Bugger that.

Ok, except maybe the size, I still think 40” is perfect, 43” is good for pc gaming too, but 48” I would like to see if I could handle it without moving my head too much, and the DPI, I don’t know if it may be too low
They all have practically the same PPI if you are at the correct distance. You also shouldn't turn your head either.
There is a calculator for this too.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
52
I see absolutely no reason to get this over the 48" LG OLED.
You'll see a reason when you look at text... ClearType works acceptably well (with the right setting) on a BGR sub-pixel structure (as on the CG437K), but not on the LG OLED RGBW. You have to either disable ClearType and use gray-scale font smoothing (which doesn't look great), or you have to put up with serious fringing with ClearType enabled.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,688
You'll see a reason when you look at text... ClearType works acceptably well (with the right setting) on a BGR sub-pixel structure (as on the CG437K), but not on the LG OLED RGBW. You have to either disable ClearType and use gray-scale font smoothing (which doesn't look great), or you have to put up with serious fringing with ClearType enabled.
After the examples earlier in the thread, I don't think its as bad as you make it out and if thats the worst thing, then I would happily compromise there and I do work with text pretty often.

Also it does not preclude microshaft making an update to cleartype to solve this even better than current workarounds.

You are not really going to see fringes at 4k pixel density if the screen is at the correct distance.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
370
You'll see a reason when you look at text... ClearType works acceptably well (with the right setting) on a BGR sub-pixel structure (as on the CG437K), but not on the LG OLED RGBW. You have to either disable ClearType and use gray-scale font smoothing (which doesn't look great), or you have to put up with serious fringing with ClearType enabled.

Text on the 43" models is 100% worse. The argument goes the other way. I've checked out text on my B9 55" OLED and it utterly destroys the 43" XG438Q and CG437K, both of which I've bought and returned for this very reason. I don't know what people are smoking if they think text on these 43" monitors will be better than the OLED because it absolutely WILL NOT. Using Better ClearType Tuner does help vs Windows' inferior tool, but there's still no question I would take OLED over these monitors when it comes to text, and everything else for that matter.

I prefer text on my 32" IPS overall though, but that's a different monitor for a different use case, plus much higher PPI of course.
 
Last edited:

bigbluefe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
790
Even my old ass B6 55" doesn't look that bad even if you're right on top of it as long as you're running RGB and not some compressed crap.

48" will probably look pretty decent.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
52
After the examples earlier in the thread, I don't think its as bad as you make it out and if thats the worst thing, then I would happily compromise there and I do work with text pretty often.

Also it does not preclude microshaft making an update to cleartype to solve this even better than current workarounds.

You are not really going to see fringes at 4k pixel density if the screen is at the correct distance.
It doesn't look right even from a distance. You don't see the detail of the fringes, but you still notice the poor rendering of the fonts. I can't tell if this is something that Microsoft could address some day in ClearType or not. Without being an expert on font rendering and the intricacies of the LG OLED sub-pixel structure, I can't say. At any rate, such support in ClearType isn't there today, and there has been no indication from Microsoft or LG that this situation will change.

You are left without a good solution if you use the display extensively for text. Neither ClearType nor gray-scale smoothing looks good. Whether you are willing to compromise on that for some other benefit of the display is a different question, but people who use the display primarily for text work should be aware of this issue.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
370
It doesn't look right even from a distance. You don't see the detail of the fringes, but you still notice the poor rendering of the fonts. I can't tell if this is something that Microsoft could address some day in ClearType or not. Without being an expert on font rendering and the intricacies of the LG OLED sub-pixel structure, I can't say. At any rate, such support in ClearType isn't there today, and there has been no indication from Microsoft or LG that this situation will change.

You are left without a good solution if you use the display extensively for text. Neither ClearType nor gray-scale smoothing looks good. Whether you are willing to compromise on that for some other benefit of the display is a different question, but people who use the display primarily for text work should be aware of this issue.

I'd question the sense of using a 48" OLED screen "primarily for text work"... add the glossy coating into the mix, and it's really far from optimal for this. Each to their own though of course. I imagine anyone doing this is probably doing so more out of protest and sheer frustration with the junk panels LCD monitors offer at inflated prices.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
52
I'd question the sense of using a 48" OLED screen "primarily for text work"... add the glossy coating into the mix, and it's really far from optimal for this. Each to their own though of course. I imagine anyone doing this is probably doing so more out of protest and sheer frustration with the junk panels LCD monitors offer at inflated prices.
Right, so an OLED TV isn't really a substitute for an LCD monitor unless you use it mostly for things other than text.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
370
Right, so an OLED TV isn't really a substitute for an LCD monitor unless you use it mostly for things other than text.

If you spend your days in Word documents, Powerpoint and browsing the web (what I would define as "primarily text work") then no, it really isn't. An IPS RGB matte screen would be better, probably no bigger than 32" depending on your sitting distance, 4K preferable if you have good vision. If your use case ALSO involves a variety of media including videos, film and games however, then it very much is.
 

chimera991

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
1,127
With a price drop to $1199, is this monitor worth it?

I want a 43" 4k that will do 120hz and this is it.
It's just crazy that my 55" oled was $1k shipped.

The setup will be within 3-4 feet from each other.
 

Sky15

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2001
Messages
2,949
With a price drop to $1199, is this monitor worth it?

I want a 43" 4k that will do 120hz and this is it.
It's just crazy that my 55" oled was $1k shipped.

The setup will be within 3-4 feet from each other.
I had no idea this was available, and I've been looking to replace my 4 year old Predator X34. That Price seems really good too.
 

sethk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,797
What about the horrible motion blur on the Asus - is this Acer any better in that sense?
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
Picked one up last week. decided not to bother with the 144hz OC with 2 DP cables and went the single DP 120hz route. It's setup at the office at the moment as I'm building a new PC to go with it but I'm only there 2 days out of week with the virus lock down. I should be moving it home this week so if you have any questions that was not covered by the reviews up online and on Youtube. Feel free to drop me a note and I can see if I can answer it. Ran Armored Warfare at 4K with pretty much everything maxed and getting about 90fps using a 2080. Will pickup a 2080 Super or Ti next month (waiting for the new Intel CPU and mobo) and see what I can get.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
370
Picked one up last week. decided not to bother with the 144hz OC with 2 DP cables and went the single DP 120hz route. It's setup at the office at the moment as I'm building a new PC to go with it but I'm only there 2 days out of week with the virus lock down. I should be moving it home this week so if you have any questions that was not covered by the reviews up online and on Youtube. Feel free to drop me a note and I can see if I can answer it. Ran Armored Warfare at 4K with pretty much everything maxed and getting about 90fps using a 2080. Will pickup a 2080 Super or Ti next month (waiting for the new Intel CPU and mobo) and see what I can get.
Why wait for Intel? At 4K just go AMD and save money. There will be ZERO benefit to going Intel at that resolution.
 

toxnox

n00b
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
4
It would be nice if you could test if the black smearing is as bad as some have reportet. In the viedos shown on youtube i can not notice it at all. It would be nice if someone could confirm if this is really as bad as some testers say.
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
It would be nice if you could test if the black smearing is as bad as some have reportet. In the viedos shown on youtube i can not notice it at all. It would be nice if someone could confirm if this is really as bad as some testers say.
Yes it's as bad as people say. Doesn't matter the overdrive setting you use but more importantly, it's much more smeary with VRR enabled when you're in the 70-90FPS range.

I found the text quality better than the XG438Q which is unexplainable to me since they use the same panel.

I can't stress enough how massive a difference there is between one of these and a decent IPS monitor in motion. You can't see jack shit when turning the camera on this monitor.
Unfortunately! No one makes a 40"-43" IPS HDR panel that goes over 60hz. Even for a VA panel, there is only one source so it's not like you really have a choice. But then again, I have not had any problem using a older tech 40" VA 4K for the last 3 years so I must not be seeing what you're seeing. Now, if I'm doing a lot of office work. Word, excel, etc. I'll probably switch back to my current 32" 4K IPS but for browsing, light gaming, watching videos. I much prefer the more vibrant color and deeper black from a 10bit or 8bit+FRC VA panel.
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
It would be nice if you could test if the black smearing is as bad as some have reportet. In the viedos shown on youtube i can not notice it at all. It would be nice if someone could confirm if this is really as bad as some testers say.
Have a link to the video?
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
A lot of people seems to be really concern about text quality on a BGR VA panel. Sure, they're not as crisp as a IPS but I've used them for a few years without problem. I have 3 of them right now and I find all three quite usable. I just shot the follow 3 videos to show what I mean. They are shot with a DJI Osmo Pocket gimbal camera at 4K@60. Don't know how well it will come across but here it goes (all image are darker than what I actually see as they are dimmed by the camera since they're quite bright). The first one is my current home monitor. A 2015 Samsung 40JU7500 that have long since been eclipsed by new and brighter VA but back in early 2016 (when I got it). It was surprising decent.


Next up is the Vizio M437 Go. Rated by Rtings as the best 43" 4K at 7.7 (until this week when it was replaced by the Samsung Q60T with a lower 7.1 rating). It's getting hard to find since it's a 2019 model but damn, it looks really good if you just need a 43" 4K monitor. Colors are vibrant, texts are sharp, not really bright as far as HDR goes but better than most IPS monitor and at $379 if you can still find one. It's a steal. I'll be using this at the office (with the current Acer B326HK as a 2nd screen for serious office work).


Last one is the Acer CG437K. at over 3 times the price of the Vizio (although I paid less). It's expensive, but still cheaper than what I paid for my first LCD monitor, a Viewsonic 20" at almost $2000 back in the days and also less than what I paid for the Samsung 40JU7500. While rated at 1000 nits vs the Vzio's 450. It's wasn't really noticeable unless you're watching HDR contents). The color is not as vibrant and the black doesn't seems to be as dark as the Vizio but still pretty good (that maybe also be due to different default factory settings). Compared to the Vizio, It's a lot more to pay just to get over 60hz refresh so you have to decide if it's worth it.

 
Last edited:

toxnox

n00b
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
4
Here is one of the Videos
It would be nice if you could make a video ingame with some motion 👍

I want to decide if it is a problem for me. I come from an 43“ VA TV and have no Problem with the VA Panel at all. So chancen are that a litte smearing is nothing i would worry about if it is not to bad.
 
Last edited:

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
Here is one of the Videos
It would be nice if you could make a video ingame with some motion 👍

I want to decide if it is a problem for me. I come from an 43“ VA TV and have no Problem with the VA Panel at all. So chancen are that a litte smearing is nothing i would worry about if it is not to bad.
You really can't depend on the a Youtube video shot at 720p at unknown frame rate. The Vizio and Acer is located at the office and I'll try to shoot some game footage with the Osmo Pocket @4K60 on a tripod next time I go in (only once or twice a week with the quarantine).
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
O.k.that would be nice! 👍
Ended up having to go to office to receive a package so I just uploaded the following videos, both were filmed while playing this Youtube clip starting at the 4:00 mark:


Here's the once from the Vizio M437. even in the office with overhead lights. The camera still dimmed the image a bit and the Vizio have a more reflective screen with makes for some focus pluseing from the camera. There's also a shaded window behind the the filming position so you see the tall rectangle outline on the center of the screen.


This one is from the Acer CG437K in the same office be there's not window facing the screen and the Acer also have a less reflective screen so focusing is a bit better.


The Acer video is still uploading as I type this so it'll take another hour before you can see the 4K rendered version

Also for reference. This is the kind of low light footage you can normally expect from the Osmo Pocket in 4K

 
Last edited:

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
Like I mentioned in the other thread, the Acer's lack of backlight control and peak brightness (1200nits) are a terrible combination. You're video demonstrates that although the Vizio is dimmer, it preserves dark areas as they are intended instead of blowing the entire screen out.

What's sad is they basically have the same zone count but $900 separates them.
Have you try different setting at all. I didn't stay long at the office so all I did was film the video and left. I believe the Acer brightness and backlight are set to 100% and both can probably come down a bit. I'll give that a try next time I'm in office and see if I can bring it down without crushing the black. I'll also take my PS4P to the office and and shoot some footage with the calibrated in game HDR setting.

I think the Vizio came across really well considering the price and the QLED (which I don't believe the Acer has) definitely helps giving a slightly more vibrant picture but I felt that the color palette seems a bit too artificial/vibrant. More like what you see in stores when they put all the TV in demo mode, Especially the Red. will have to play with that also.
 
Last edited:

toxnox

n00b
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
4
Thank you for the Videos! :) I think for my usecase the Monitor is o.k. I don´t play fast Shooters so it will be fine.
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
Thank you for the Videos! :) I think for my usecase the Monitor is o.k. I don´t play fast Shooters so it will be fine.
If you don't need more than 60hz and you have room for a larger monitor. You'll probably be better off getting a 49" Samsung Q70R or Q80T. Not only do they cost less, they look spectacular.
 

TMCM

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
1,412
If you don't need more than 60hz and you have room for a larger monitor. You'll probably be better off getting a 49" Samsung Q70R or Q80T. Not only do they cost less, they look spectacular.
Vouch for the Q70R. I have the 49in one and it's killer
 

chimera991

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
1,127
The acer and asus 43" 4k monitors are priced close to the LG oled 48". After waiting for months only to be disappointed, i think im pulling the trigger on the LG.
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
The acer and asus 43" 4k monitors are priced close to the LG oled 48". After waiting for months only to be disappointed, i think im pulling the trigger on the LG.
The problem with the LG is that you have to wait for the next gen RTX if you're a nVidia user (which I am) to get past 60hz using HDMI 2.1 (which is also not fully implemented on the LG). I also wants a good display along good sounds as I do watch movies sometimes while not using the living room setup. That means using HDMI to a Dolby Atmos receivers at both my home and work office. Most of them does not support HDMI 2.1 yet so you won't be able to get 4K past 60hz. Using a monitor with DP 1.4 means that I can pipe 4K@120 using the DP and direct the audio using HDMI to the receiver. I'll go HDMI 2.1 when I do my next round of upgrades in a few years when everything gets worked out.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,758
The problem with the LG is that you have to wait for the next gen RTX if you're a nVidia user (which I am) to get past 60hz using HDMI 2.1 (which is also not fully implemented on the LG). I also wants a good display along good sounds as I do watch movies sometimes while not using the living room setup. That means using HDMI to a Dolby Atmos receivers at both my home and work office. Most of them does not support HDMI 2.1 yet so you won't be able to get 4K past 60hz. Using a monitor with DP 1.4 means that I can pipe 4K@120 using the DP and direct the audio using HDMI to the receiver. I'll go HDMI 2.1 when I do my next round of upgrades in a few years when everything gets worked out.
You could just use eARC for the audio. I see no point in buying any of the ASUS and Acer 43" models, they just really messed those up with a bad panel and bad overdrive settings. I really hope they try again as a 40-43" 120+ Hz display would be very welcome on the market, even if it is an LCD.
 

PlasmaSDR

n00b
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
1
I just got one of these to replace a flaky 40" Philips 4065. I have a C8 55" oled as well but needed displayport. This monitor is totally fine as a replacement for the 4065 at 120hz. In a pinch you can even do 4:2:2 120hz over DP 1.2.

Not a horrible deal for $1000 and at least motion in videos is more correct than being locked at 60hz. I would never use HDR on this since it seems pointless to true blacks on a OLED, but at the same time I doubt an OLED can keep up with showing text 12-14 hours a day.
 

Commander Shepard

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 12, 2016
Messages
4,405
IMO, the only reason to consider the Acer or Asus is the size difference between them and the 48" LG CX. Anything over 43" just doesn't work for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky15
like this

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
You could just use eARC for the audio. I see no point in buying any of the ASUS and Acer 43" models, they just really messed those up with a bad panel and bad overdrive settings. I really hope they try again as a 40-43" 120+ Hz display would be very welcome on the market, even if it is an LCD.
Depending on manufacturers, eARC does not support some of the highend audio codecs. I have been using the CG437K for over a month and maybe because I don't really play FPS (does Armored Warfare and MMO counts?). I don't really have any problem. I also think that if you're willing to settle for 4K@120 using a single DP with HDR and VRR, you get much better results than using trying ot get 4K@144 using 2 DP cables. Another reason is the my desktop consist of a lot of windows at the same positions so burn ins may become a problem with any OLED panels.
 

Wiz33

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
273
IMO, the only reason to consider the Acer or Asus is the size difference between them and the 48" LG CX. Anything over 43" just doesn't work for me.
That's another reason. I'm old and I have computer glasses that's set at about 30" and getting a 48" will require me to set it further back on the desk but even if I'm will to get new glasses, I would rather go with a 49" Q70R or Q80T and not worried about an early HDMI 2.1 implementation that may prove to be problematic (it seems it's already is). I would suggest getting one from a place with easy returns and give the Acer a try.
 
Top