Acer X27 4k 144hz HDR Gsync

cybereality

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,181
I'm not sure why that is happening, but it's actually desired behavior. With G-Sync you want to be around 2 or 3 frames below the max refresh. So for 120Hz you want an 118 fps frame cap. This helps with lag.

You can set this yourself in RivaTuner. I do 2 below, so 164 fps on my 166Hz monitor. It's also best if you disable V-Sync in game settings and then set Nvidia settings to force V-Sync on. Those are the best settings.
 

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
I'm not sure why that is happening, but it's actually desired behavior. With G-Sync you want to be around 2 or 3 frames below the max refresh. So for 120Hz you want an 118 fps frame cap. This helps with lag.

You can set this yourself in RivaTuner. I do 2 below, so 164 fps on my 166Hz monitor. It's also best if you disable V-Sync in game settings and then set Nvidia settings to force V-Sync on. Those are the best settings.
That's true. As far as I know there isn't any program I am running that is capping the frame rate. I checked RivaTuner and the frame rate limiter is at zero. This isn't a big deal or anything and like you said it's the best settings for having a smooth experience with less input lag but it's still odd why it is happening. Did Nvidia sneak some feature into their later drivers to cause this? Or is it a driver bug like the one that happened a while back? Maybe I'm missing something else?

EDIT: I have figured out the cause of this! Turns out it was the ASUS Aura Sync software. I had the lighting mode set to Rainbow and setting it to a static color or turning it off altogether was the fix. What a pain that was to figure out. Now I'm curious as to why setting it to Rainbow would mess with the behavior of G-Sync + V-Sync on? Oh well, glad it's fixed.
 
Last edited:

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
I just now noticed a stuck pixel on my replacement X27. So, two monitors with pixel defects. Now I'm not sure what to do with this monitor. I really don't want to send it back again but the stuck pixel is infuriating due to how expensive this monitor was. As far as I can tell my OLED TV that my consoles are hooked up to doesn't have any pixel defects after more than two years of ownership. Crap like this makes me want to sell all of my high end PC parts and just stick with console gaming on my OLED TV.
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,528
I just now noticed a stuck pixel on my replacement X27. So, two monitors with pixel defects. Now I'm not sure what to do with this monitor. I really don't want to send it back again but the stuck pixel is infuriating due to how expensive this monitor was. As far as I can tell my OLED TV that my consoles are hooked up to doesn't have any pixel defects after more than two years of ownership. Crap like this makes me want to sell all of my high end PC parts and just stick with console gaming on my OLED TV.
Unfortunately this kind not problem is "normal" on monitors and you cantc avoid it if not by returning them. I had a stuck pixel too for two times consecutive and I not sent the monitor back.
After few months that pixel was so disturbing that I sold the monitor. You spent a lot of moneyf forthat monitor, if it's not perfect, give it back to the seller.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I just now noticed a stuck pixel on my replacement X27. So, two monitors with pixel defects. Now I'm not sure what to do with this monitor. I really don't want to send it back again but the stuck pixel is infuriating due to how expensive this monitor was. As far as I can tell my OLED TV that my consoles are hooked up to doesn't have any pixel defects after more than two years of ownership. Crap like this makes me want to sell all of my high end PC parts and just stick with console gaming on my OLED TV.
Sometimes you can unstuck a pixel if pressing the area of the screen a bit, not too hard though. There are also apps that try to cycle through colors to make the pixel come to life but I have never had any luck with them. Dead pixels happen but should not be a thing with a screen this expensive. I would probably weight it against other factors like backlight uniformity and location of the stuck pixel, e.g. is this example of the display otherwise good enough to warrant living with the dead pixel, especially considering how many pixels a 4K screen has.
 

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
Unfortunately this kind not problem is "normal" on monitors and you cantc avoid it if not by returning them. I had a stuck pixel too for two times consecutive and I not sent the monitor back.
After few months that pixel was so disturbing that I sold the monitor. You spent a lot of moneyf forthat monitor, if it's not perfect, give it back to the seller.
I've decided to try sending it back but I have to go through Acer since the return period with NewEgg is over so who knows how it will go. If Acer won't accept the return then I'll try selling the monitor and simply cut my losses on it and put the money towards a 2019 OLED TV. Pixel defects should not be this common in more expensive monitors. They should be extremely rare to non-existent at this point. My previous monitor which was the first ASUS Swift had a few dead pixels as well but I made myself let it go.

Sometimes you can unstuck a pixel if pressing the area of the screen a bit, not too hard though. There are also apps that try to cycle through colors to make the pixel come to life but I have never had any luck with them. Dead pixels happen but should not be a thing with a screen this expensive. I would probably weight it against other factors like backlight uniformity and location of the stuck pixel, e.g. is this example of the display otherwise good enough to warrant living with the dead pixel, especially considering how many pixels a 4K screen has.
I've tried running Pixel Healer on both of the X27s I've had but no luck. I haven't tried the pressure method yet but I might if I get brave. The stuck pixel is more towards the right of the screen so it's not too in the way but it's still annoying. Uniformity of the panel is very similar to the last X27 I had which is alright but could maybe be better. It's also worth mentioning that this panel has a dead pixel as well but it's in the extreme left corner of the screen. If this was the only pixel defect I'd let it go but the bright blue stuck pixel I can't.
 

xorbe

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
6,026
That's why I kept my X27 with 2 dead pixels on the far left. I didn't want to chance getting a replacement with a stuck-on pixel or something in the center. Just not worth the hassle.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I've tried running Pixel Healer on both of the X27s I've had but no luck. I haven't tried the pressure method yet but I might if I get brave. The stuck pixel is more towards the right of the screen so it's not too in the way but it's still annoying. Uniformity of the panel is very similar to the last X27 I had which is alright but could maybe be better. It's also worth mentioning that this panel has a dead pixel as well but it's in the extreme left corner of the screen. If this was the only pixel defect I'd let it go but the bright blue stuck pixel I can't.
Yeah pixels stuck on a specific color are definitely a magnitude worse than pixels that are just dead.
 

ZeqOBpf6

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
606
Pixel defects should not be this common in more expensive monitors. They should be extremely rare to non-existent at this point.
I agree. I thought dead and stuck pixels haven't really been an issue since the very early days of LCDs.

Though, to be fair, a 4k screen has 8.3 million pixels, so 1 out of 8 million *is* in the territory of extremely rare.

For me it would depend mostly on where the pixel is.
 

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
I agree. I thought dead and stuck pixels haven't really been an issue since the very early days of LCDs.

Though, to be fair, a 4k screen has 8.3 million pixels, so 1 out of 8 million *is* in the territory of extremely rare.

For me it would depend mostly on where the pixel is.
I feel that defective pixels should not be a thing anymore as well and in most screens they aren't but they still are in PC monitors for some reason. I keep wondering why this is the case. Do the companies that sell the monitors just don't care about QC? Or is it the fault of the panel makers like AUO who don't have a good process of making them so the companies who buy their panels have no choice but to accept poor panels? Maybe smaller screens are harder to make? Who knows for sure but either way I'm sick of it. It's pathetic that we have come to expect pixel defects in monitors that we pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars for. Every time a new monitor is announced the big question everyone has is: How is the QC? Will they have pixel defects? Back light bleed? So on and so forth. The fact it is like this is bull crap and I'm ready to just buy a new 2019 model TV when they come out and say screw monitors for good. Now that TVs are coming with VRR tech and high refresh rates there is less and less need for these "gaming" monitors with garbage QC.
 

sharknice

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
1,928
I feel that defective pixels should not be a thing anymore as well and in most screens they aren't but they still are in PC monitors for some reason. I keep wondering why this is the case. Do the companies that sell the monitors just don't care about QC? Or is it the fault of the panel makers like AUO who don't have a good process of making them so the companies who buy their panels have no choice but to accept poor panels? Maybe smaller screens are harder to make? Who knows for sure but either way I'm sick of it. It's pathetic that we have come to expect pixel defects in monitors that we pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars for. Every time a new monitor is announced the big question everyone has is: How is the QC? Will they have pixel defects? Back light bleed? So on and so forth. The fact it is like this is bull crap and I'm ready to just buy a new 2019 model TV when they come out and say screw monitors for good. Now that TVs are coming with VRR tech and high refresh rates there is less and less need for these "gaming" monitors with garbage QC.

I think it's a cost issue. Someone like Acer makes a deal with AUO and have a choice between $200 per panel with a maximum of 3 dead pixels or pays $225 per panel with a maximum of 1 dead pixel, or $250 for guaranteed no dead pixels. Otherwise they're just throwing away the flawed panels. Maybe they actually do that with TVs and bigger screens probably have better results because there's more space to work with..
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
There are plenty of dead and some stuck pixels on TVs, it's no different there. However I don't, as a rule, think that dead pixels on a high density 4K panel are an issue. You just aren't going to notice them unless you go looking for them specifically. Stuck pixels are different - they are much more noticeable and annoying, but also much less common. I haven't found a stuck pixel on a PC monitor purchase in 7 or 8 years. Generally speaking, though, I always buy monitors from Amazon for 0 time and effort automatic returns for any reason.
 

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
I think it's a cost issue. Someone like Acer makes a deal with AUO and have a choice between $200 per panel with a maximum of 3 dead pixels or pays $225 per panel with a maximum of 1 dead pixel, or $250 for guaranteed no dead pixels. Otherwise they're just throwing away the flawed panels. Maybe they actually do that with TVs and bigger screens probably have better results because there's more space to work with..
I can see that being the case but what they could do is use the cheaper panels in cheaper monitors and use the perfect panels in more expensive monitors such as the X27. I've heard of other companies doing this so companies like Acer and ASUS should as well. They could also be more transparent and tell you what class of panel the monitor is using on the box or on the spec sheet. If I knew upfront how many defective pixels a screen could have before buying it then it wouldn't bother me as much if it came with one or two and was priced appropriately.

There are plenty of dead and some stuck pixels on TVs, it's no different there. However I don't, as a rule, think that dead pixels on a high density 4K panel are an issue. You just aren't going to notice them unless you go looking for them specifically. Stuck pixels are different - they are much more noticeable and annoying, but also much less common. I haven't found a stuck pixel on a PC monitor purchase in 7 or 8 years. Generally speaking, though, I always buy monitors from Amazon for 0 time and effort automatic returns for any reason.
I understand that pixel defects can happen in TVs. In fact, my cheaper Samsung plasma I bought in 2015 has a pixel that is stuck blinking. I was able to let it go because it was a very good deal at the time and I later found out that the model I got could be using panels that were rejected from the higher priced models. So not only does it make some sense that it has a defective pixel but the low price I bought it for new reflects that. This is not the case with the X27.

Other than that I've never seen a defective pixel on a TV. The 2008 era LCD TV that is at my parents place doesn't have any defective pixels from what I can tell. The LCD TVs we have at my work don't have any and believe me I've looked for fun. My work monitors which might be close to a decade old now don't have any pixel defects either. Yet these expensive gaming monitors get them with ease. It's pathetic and I'm tired of making excuses for them because at this point it's inexcusable. Also, just in case it hasn't been made clear, I've had two X27s so far both with stuck pixels and a dead one to go along with it. So if stuck pixels are supposed to more rare, well, I've had them twice on a monitor that retails for $2K.
 

sharknice

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
1,928
I can see that being the case but what they could do is use the cheaper panels in cheaper monitors and use the perfect panels in more expensive monitors such as the X27. I've heard of other companies doing this so companies like Acer and ASUS should as well. They could also be more transparent and tell you what class of panel the monitor is using on the box or on the spec sheet. If I knew upfront how many defective pixels a screen could have before buying it then it wouldn't bother me as much if it came with one or two and was priced appropriately.



I understand that pixel defects can happen in TVs. In fact, my cheaper Samsung plasma I bought in 2015 has a pixel that is stuck blinking. I was able to let it go because it was a very good deal at the time and I later found out that the model I got could be using panels that were rejected from the higher priced models. So not only does it make some sense that it has a defective pixel but the low price I bought it for new reflects that. This is not the case with the X27.

Other than that I've never seen a defective pixel on a TV. The 2008 era LCD TV that is at my parents place doesn't have any defective pixels from what I can tell. The LCD TVs we have at my work don't have any and believe me I've looked for fun. My work monitors which might be close to a decade old now don't have any pixel defects either. Yet these expensive gaming monitors get them with ease. It's pathetic and I'm tired of making excuses for them because at this point it's inexcusable. Also, just in case it hasn't been made clear, I've had two X27s so far both with stuck pixels and a dead one to go along with it. So if stuck pixels are supposed to more rare, well, I've had them twice on a monitor that retails for $2K.
Some monitor manufacturers do have defective pixel policies. ViewSonic used to have a 3 pixel or less policy a long time ago. I think Dell also stated some sort of standard at some point.
 

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
Some monitor manufacturers do have defective pixel policies. ViewSonic used to have a 3 pixel or less policy a long time ago. I think Dell also stated some sort of standard at some point.
I'm aware of that but for more expensive monitors they should not only use higher class panels but also make the warranty reflect it. More expensive monitors should have a zero defective pixel policy with no questions asked. We shouldn't have to worry about an RMA being rejected because we have two bad pixels instead of three. Acer has a dead pixel policy like ViewSonic so I'm not expecting to have my RMA approved honestly which is why I'm already planning ahead to sell it.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I'm aware of that but for more expensive monitors they should not only use higher class panels but also make the warranty reflect it. More expensive monitors should have a zero defective pixel policy with no questions asked. We shouldn't have to worry about an RMA being rejected because we have two bad pixels instead of three. Acer has a dead pixel policy like ViewSonic so I'm not expecting to have my RMA approved honestly which is why I'm already planning ahead to sell it.
It used to be that manufacturers used zero dead pixel policy as a competitive advantage that they advertised. Other companies had very arbitrary rules for dead pixels e.g. X number of dead/stuck pixels in Y region of the screen (typically more allowed on edges and less or none in the center of the screen). We seem to have gone back to those shittier policies as panel pixel count has gone up significantly from the 1920x1200 screens that were the top dog back in the day.

Dead pixels are not something they can necessarily account for at the factory. I've had dead or stuck pixels come in after several weeks of using a display and that's not something they will do in factory testing, even on high end models.

At least here in Europe we generally have good return policies and several companies are competing with each other on who has the longest return policy. I've got my eyes set on the upcoming ASUS XG438Q and will definitely buy it locally due to these return policies.
 

stolikat

n00b
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
54
Who is gaming in 4K at this point? No streamers surely. Maybe like 1% of PC gamers.
 

Seyumi

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2011
Messages
221
Good guess. It's 1.42% according to Steam.
I think Steam data is a bit flawed because most of their #'s now come from China which you can guess which type of hardware they generally use. I'm not saying that Chinese people can't be gamers too (and shouldn't be included), but I'm curious what Steam metrics would look like if they only compiled data from 1st world countries (where the average working person (even part time) can afford a 4K monitor and a top-end GPU if they so desire).
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
I think Steam data is a bit flawed because most of their #'s now come from China which you can guess which type of hardware they generally use. I'm not saying that Chinese people can't be gamers too (and shouldn't be included), but I'm curious what Steam metrics would look like if they only compiled data from 1st world countries (where the average working person (even part time) can afford a 4K monitor and a top-end GPU if they so desire).
Breaking out by socio-economic region would be nice for sure. And it's hard to get into that without wading into political territory; let's just say that I'd put China as perhaps closer to North American (US and Canada) and East Asian (Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Singapore) than perhaps Indonesia, Philipines, most of India, on average.

Further, they can purchase locally-produced 4k monitors. Perhaps not the highest quality (panels not made by Samsung or LG), but certainly serviceable.
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
Even if you break down by country, the Steam survey is pretty limited. It can't tell you anything about who has access to what hardware, since it only goes by what computers Steam is installed on. For example, I have Steam installed on 2 laptops that will both report data to the survey but I don't actually use them for gaming other than the odd low-end game once in a while, but they count towards the stats just as much as my desktop PC with a 1080TI, 1440p and 4K monitors counts.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
Even if you break down by country, the Steam survey is pretty limited. It can't tell you anything about who has access to what hardware, since it only goes by what computers Steam is installed on. For example, I have Steam installed on 2 laptops that will both report data to the survey but I don't actually use them for gaming other than the odd low-end game once in a while, but they count towards the stats just as much as my desktop PC with a 1080TI, 1440p and 4K monitors counts.
Well shit, I use my ultrabook for League of Legends- and that 8550U rolls out 60FPS at 1080p, settings bottomed out of course. Given that 'low end' systems most certainly can game and that Steam games encompass everything from 8-bit side-scrolling lookalikes to the latest AAA titles, I figure that the information is relevant as presented.

So we'd need to see the information broken down further; perhaps by game performance requirements classes. Hard to be objective about classes of games and classes of hardware, but it could show what games are being played on which hardware.
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
Well shit, I use my ultrabook for League of Legends- and that 8550U rolls out 60FPS at 1080p, settings bottomed out of course. Given that 'low end' systems most certainly can game and that Steam games encompass everything from 8-bit side-scrolling lookalikes to the latest AAA titles, I figure that the information is relevant as presented.
Oh, I'm not saying it's not relevant, it's just important to keep in mind what's actually being measured. For example it's difficult to use it to generalize to gamers as a market, you can't say 1.42% of gamers have a 4K monitor. 1.42% of systems in the survey have a 4K monitor attached to them used as primary display. But multiple people might have access to a given desktop and use it for gaming, and also it's likely the number of low end systems are padded by systems that are rarely used[for gaming, like my work laptop!] or are only used as secondary systems in addition to a primary. So, more gamers probably have access to high-end systems than the survey indicates.... but it's impossible to know how many more.

I have a 4K monitor, but if you count my systems only 1/3 have a 4K monitor, so if every person who has a 4K monitor is similar to me(unlikely, but you get the idea), then there would actually be 3x as many people who have a 4K monitor compared to the stat percentage.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
Add to that another challenge: I have a 4k monitor on the system that I most use to game, but I don't play games on it :)
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,626
Who is gaming in 4K at this point? No streamers surely. Maybe like 1% of PC gamers.
I am. Although it wasn't cheap. This panel plus a 2080ti was pretty expensive. Totally worth it for me though. Pushing 10-bit 4k HDR @ 98hz w/ G-Sync is outstanding.

I would in no way recommend this panel if you can't afford a 2080ti though. It's better to just wait for GPU's to get better in a couple of years, and hopefully this panel or ones like it will also be cheaper. It just doesn't make sense buying this thing if you can't drive it over 60hz.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,332
I am. Although it wasn't cheap. This panel plus a 2080ti was pretty expensive. Totally worth it for me though. Pushing 10-bit 4k HDR @ 98hz w/ G-Sync is outstanding.

I would in no way recommend this panel if you can't afford a 2080ti though. It's better to just wait for GPU's to get better in a couple of years, and hopefully this panel or ones like it will also be cheaper. It just doesn't make sense buying this thing if you can't drive it over 60hz.
I am, as well.

A 1080 Ti is fine with this monitor. I was getting 50-70 FPS in the games I played with my Titan X. G-SYNC makes framerate in that range very playable. And that was without making compromises on graphical quality. It would be easy to stay above 60 by turning a couple settings down. A 2080 Ti will get you over 80 FPS without compromise in a lot of games, though. So while it is easier, it's not necessary to enjoy this monitor.
 

riffcho

n00b
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
41
I have probably bought over 30 displays from 15" to 27" in the last 15 years for the company I work for. And they were 99% the cheapest available, for general office use. Apart from one monitor developing 2 horizontal lines of dead pixels there were no other dead/stuck pixel problems. Other problems after long use yes but not dead/stuck pixel.
 

EvilViking

I Drank All Your Beer
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
1,276
I am, as well.

A 1080 Ti is fine with this monitor. I was getting 50-70 FPS in the games I played with my Titan X. G-SYNC makes framerate in that range very playable. And that was without making compromises on graphical quality. It would be easy to stay above 60 by turning a couple settings down. A 2080 Ti will get you over 80 FPS without compromise in a lot of games, though. So while it is easier, it's not necessary to enjoy this monitor.
Hmmm considering this monitor with a 1080ti too. Are you using vysnc on or off in games/nvidia settings?

Is the screen buttery smooth at 50+fps and g-sync?
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,626
Most games will run fine with a 1080ti, but any newer game a 1080ti isn't enough IMO. AC Odyssey with high settings @ 4k was only hitting 30-40 FPS on a 1080ti for example. At that point, even with G-Sync, it's just too low of a frame rate for me personally.
 

hmcindie

n00b
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
1
Hey guys, bought this monitor about a week ago. Mainly for the FALD as I kinda grew old of my previous IPS (Acer xb27hu) and it's black levels. So is it any good? For me, yes. Played a bit of Pubg and eventhough it has a smidgeon more input lag (maybe?) than the xb27hu I still managed to get some headshots done. The quality of the image in srgb mode is great. A bit more native contrast would be awesome but the FALD does what I wanted it to do which is give that extra spark that I've been missing from the CRT days. There is a bit of haloing but as I tend to use the monitor at 150nits or less the haloing is quite small. Mostly noticed on the desktop and with icons. I don't really mind as the tradeoff for those black levels is worth it. I think I have maybe one stuck(ish) pixel on the bottom right but as I can't really see it I'm gonna give it a pass. Using 150% scaling which works great, DPI is awesome and everything is tack sharp. Using 120hz for everything. Haven't noticed the fan that much, maybe once after playing around with HDR. 4k at 27" compared to 1440p is a surprisinly huge difference in games. Not really feeling the need for a 32" model.

The monitor also looks considerably better than the professional grade monitors I use at work (which is hilarious).

All-in-all, it's a bigger difference than I thought it would be. Also upgraded my 1080 ti to the 2080ti too so it is a bit costly.

Weirdly, I haven't found a way to grade HDR videos. Resolve wants an external monitor and Premiere/AE just can't.

I'm gonna give this one a 4/5 and save the remaining star for a future micro/miniled panel.
 
Last edited:

GameLifter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
362
Hey guys, bought this monitor about a week ago. Mainly for the FALD as I kinda grew old of my previous IPS (Acer xb27hu) and it's black levels. So is it any good? For me, yes. Played a bit of Pubg and eventhough it has a smidgeon more input lag (maybe?) than the xb27hu I still managed to get some headshots done. The quality of the image in srgb mode is great. A bit more native contrast would be awesome but the FALD does what I wanted it to do which is give that extra spark that I've been missing from the CRT days. There is a bit of haloing but as I tend to use the monitor at 150nits or less the haloing is quite small. Mostly noticed on the desktop and with icons. I don't really mind as the tradeoff for those black levels is worth it. I think I have maybe one stuck(ish) pixel on the bottom right but as I can't really see it I'm gonna give it a pass. Using 150% scaling which works great, DPI is awesome and everything is tack sharp. Using 120hz for everything. Haven't noticed the fan that much, maybe once after playing around with HDR. 4k at 27" compared to 1440p is a surprisinly huge difference in games. Not really feeling the need for a 32" model.

The monitor also looks considerably better than the professional grade monitors I use at work (which is hilarious).

All-in-all, it's a bigger difference than I thought it would be. Also upgraded my 1080 ti to the 2080ti too so it is a bit costly.

Weirdly, I haven't found a way to grade HDR videos. Resolve wants an external monitor and Premiere/AE just can't.

I'm gonna give this one a 4/5 and save the remaining star for a future micro/miniled panel.
The monitor itself is indeed fantastic which makes it all the more disappointing to me that mine has a stuck pixel. Maybe I'll fully get over the stuck pixel one day but for now it's disappointing to say the least.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,332
Hmmm considering this monitor with a 1080ti too. Are you using vysnc on or off in games/nvidia settings?

Is the screen buttery smooth at 50+fps and g-sync?
I don't have the Titan X anymore, but I always use G-SYNC with V-Sync turned on in the NVIDIA control panel and V-Sync turned off in games. 50+ FPS is smooth, but below that you start to notice the slower framerate a lot more. The display is still tear free, it's just that 30 FPS is still 30 FPS if you know what I'm saying.
Most games will run fine with a 1080ti, but any newer game a 1080ti isn't enough IMO. AC Odyssey with high settings @ 4k was only hitting 30-40 FPS on a 1080ti for example. At that point, even with G-Sync, it's just too low of a frame rate for me personally.
To be fair AC Odyssey is a performance hog. Other games like Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Resident Evil 2 are still fine at 4K with a 1080 Ti.
 

cajer

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
11
I'm thinking about getting an X27. I am thinking about also using if for photo editing. I was wondering how well the variable backlight (local dimming in SDR) work? Do you see haloing in pictures and static images? Does it improve contrast significantly in SDR?
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,528
I'm thinking about getting an X27. I am thinking about also using if for photo editing. I was wondering how well the variable backlight (local dimming in SDR) work? Do you see haloing in pictures and static images? Does it improve contrast significantly in SDR?
as far as I know, FALD is disabled when not in HDR mode.
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,626
as far as I know, FALD is disabled when not in HDR mode.
I use FALD on sdr mode all the time. It generally looks great when playing games.

To answer the comment above about haloing/etc; I wouldn't keep FALD on for photo editing because you can get some occasional haloing depending on what's going on with the picture.

And yes, FALD helps out a lot for SDR since this is an IPS panel. It allows blacks to actually be black in SDR mode and not have the typical IPS glow.

I don't regret buying this panel at all. 4K/HDR/120hz/G-Sync is hard to argue with if you have the GPU to push it properly.
 
Last edited:

cajer

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
11
I use FALD on sdr mode all the time. It generally looks great when playing games.

To answer the comment above about haloing/etc; I wouldn't keep FALD on for photo editing because you can get some occasional haloing depending on what's going on with the picture.

And yes, FALD helps out a lot for SDR since this is an IPS panel. It allows blacks to actually be black in SDR mode and not have the typical IPS glow.

I don't regret buying this panel at all. 4K/HDR/120hz/G-Sync is hard to argue with if you have the GPU to push it properly.
Do you happen to have a picture of video of what the haloing looks like in normal usage, eg: not a white cursor on a black screen? I’m some what skeptical that 384 dimming zones is enough to know show allot of haloing in pictures that aren’t super simple
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,626
Do you happen to have a picture of video of what the haloing looks like in normal usage, eg: not a white cursor on a black screen? I’m some what skeptical that 384 dimming zones is enough to know show allot of haloing in pictures that aren’t super simple
It could absolutely use twice as many dimming zones, in my opinion. But you have to remember this is also still only a 27'' panel.

I don't have any pictures, but i'm pretty sure you can look at some reviews that will show you it. You don't really see the haloing if it isn't a scenario like you describe, whites on top / next to complete black.
 
Top