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

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
7,186
Acer XB270HU, essentially an upgraded ROG Swift with an IPS panel.

Highlights:
-27" 2560x1440 IPS
-144 Hz
-G-Sync
-ULMB Strobing backlight Mode
-4ms GtG
-Zero PWM



XB270HU-featuredmain.png



Since the debut of G-SYNC our partners have released many TN models, with resolutions ranging from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 (4K), and features that further improve your experience. Today, G-SYNC enters a new era with the unveiling of the world’s first 144Hz IPS G-SYNC monitor at The International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Engineered by Acer, the 2560x1440 XB270HU is the world’s first 144Hz IPS gaming monitor, the world's first IPS G-SYNC gaming monitor, the first IPS gaming monitor to also support NVIDIA Ultra Low Motion Blur (ULMB) technology, and one of the world’s first IPS monitors with a response time of only 4ms G-to-G.


Acer-XB270HU-front-view.jpg



Why the fuss about IPS G-SYNC at 144Hz? For many enthusiasts it’s the monitor Holy Grail, combining IPS’s wide viewing angles, bright displays, and highly accurate colors with G-SYNC’s lighting fast, super smooth gaming technology, which fixes IPS’s traditionally poor gaming performance. Together, IPS and G-SYNC make your games look and play better than ever before.

In addition to its G-SYNC and IPS technology, the Acer XB270HU is a fully featured monitor, offering just about every extra you could hope for. Starting from the top, the screen can be height adjusted, titled, rotated into Portrait, and VESA wall mounted. On the side there’s the required DisplayPort 1.2 output for G-SYNC, plus HDMI and DVI outputs for game consoles and other devices, as well as audio out and two USB 3.0 ports for accessories or storage.


XB270HU_10-640px.png



-Acer XB270HU is the world’s first NVIDIA® G-SYNC™ enabled gaming monitor with an IPS display that offers consistent, clear images from 178-degree wide viewing angles.The screen will feature Acer's EyeProtect technology including Blue Light Filter and Flicker less backlight.

The Acer XB270HU monitor will be available globally and begin shipping in April 2015.

________________________________________________________________________________

Reviews:

TFTCentral: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_xb270hu.htm

SWEClockers: https://translate.google.com/transl...erad-gamingskarm-i-144-hz-med-nvidia-g-sync/1
 
Last edited:
Nice!

will be waiting a little bit longer now with buying a monitor. was about to jump on the Dell U3414W.

interested where this 1 will lead to!
 
Not to rain on the parade, but it seems that the rumors of a bad press release might be true, I have checked a couple of listings in taobao (that could be wrong) but is listed next to the XB270HA as a TN panel difference being 2560x1440 of the HU to the 1080 of the HA. Now, one of the shops I usually buy from specialize in Displays and they haven't heard anything of it being an IPS monitor. :(

But I hope it is, I love my XL2411T but the colors suck, this seems to be the monitor to rule them all, (until they come with a 4k 144hz one).
 
Still no info about coating coating type used and a lot of confusion if it's DP only or DP+HDMI+DVI
 
It's actually kind of cheap...

Really excited to see how good this thing will actually be. Don't really think it will replace my Swift though, unless it's factory calibrated with decent contrast and no excessive panel lottery. It's close now... we will know soon enough.
 
Still no info about coating coating type used and a lot of confusion if it's DP only or DP+HDMI+DVI

I'd also like to know more about the coating. Vega's OP is the first time I've heard anything about whether this screen would be glossy, matte or something in between. What's the source, Vega?
 
Not sure coating has ever been confirmed but it would make certain sense to assume it has a coating similar to the other AHVA panels by AUO ( M270DAN01.0) - the BL2710PT and GW2765HT.
They appear to have a lighter matte type coating, free of cross-hatching and the crystalline effect should only become visible from angles. Light to moderate anti-glare properties.

sources:
http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-benq-bl2710pt-teil6.html#Coating
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/5718...i_testirovanie_monitora_BenQ_BL2710PT.html#19
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/6489...itora-benq-gw2765ht-perelomnyj-moment.html#19

One of the most important aspects will be the Overdrive implementation of this monitor, especally since its IPS and 144hz.
And Acer has not shown much competence as of late in that regard...some of their latest models had strong unadjustable overdrive with inverse ghosting/overshoot, finding the right balance and giving adjustment options is key here. This is why its important to wait for good response time tests by prad and tftcentral.
 
Last edited:
The semi-gloss AR film isn't "confirmed", just my deduction based off of recent AUO panels. If it's not semi-gloss, I will amend the OP. I don't see why AUO would go back to a crap matte film like used on the Swift. :p
 
*boxes three Rog Swifts up for ebay sale*

*Takes Pants Off*

*Patiently watches calender*
 
The semi-gloss AR film isn't "confirmed", just my deduction based off of recent AUO panels. If it's not semi-gloss, I will amend the OP. I don't see why AUO would go back to a crap matte film like used on the Swift. :p

Was that matte film ever a real problem, though? I make a distinction between actual real-world issues and pet-peeve issues. Not all matte films are created equal, just not like all TN panels are. The difference between a typical 1080p TN panel and the Swift's are miles apart.
 
Was that matte film ever a real problem, though? I make a distinction between actual real-world issues and pet-peeve issues. Not all matte films are created equal, just not like all TN panels are. The difference between a typical 1080p TN panel and the Swift's are miles apart.

I gave the ROG Swift a pass (publicly so) due to the filter. I understand some people can benefit from it. But when you put anything...regardless of how "tuned" or how "aggressive" you claim that it isn't, between the display and your eyes, you are taking away from image quality. ROG Swift became a no-buy for me because it used TN, which was already bad compared to IPS/PLS, but then also stuck a matte filter over top of it.

This one...I really hope the end product is glossy. The fact that it's an IPS means that I'll buy it regardless...but it's just such a waste/shame to put a filter on it. Based on how the light has spread/reflected on a few pictures I've seen of the monitor, it does indeed look to have a matte filter on there. How strong the filter is, I don't know. How easy will it be to remove? I'm not sure. But since removing it would also void the warranty...and seeing how problematic the ROG Swift has been...it's not something I'd want to do. So I do hope that they go full gloss on this monitor. I would easily and happily pay an extra $100 for a stock gloss model.
 
so, what do you think this will cost in Canada guys?

Expect it to be in the $899-$1199 CAD range depending on how aggressively they plan to challenge Asus who happens to be their only competitor.

My personal guess would be $999 CAD.
 
Was that matte film ever a real problem, though? I make a distinction between actual real-world issues and pet-peeve issues. Not all matte films are created equal, just not like all TN panels are. The difference between a typical 1080p TN panel and the Swift's are miles apart.

Yes, matte film belongs on monitors used in office buildings not light controlled gaming environments. I know people that didn't buy the Swift solely because of the film.
 
Expect it to be in the $899-$1199 CAD range depending on how aggressively they plan to challenge Asus who happens to be their only competitor.

My personal guess would be $999 CAD.

I see, well, yea... since i returned $1k Monitor (couple days ago), that is something that can be purchased, but, still... i think they are going very crazy with the prices.
 
the bezel looks pretty thick. that's the only drawback i see so far.

I agree. Actually some of the best things about the Asus Swift IMO are the "small things." The thin bezels (both width and thickness from the panel itself) are great. Also, the OSD interface with the little joystick is just fantastic - easily the responsive and natural setup I have EVER seen for any PC monitor by a long shot. Another small thing that you just get used to with the Swift and then anything else becomes super annoying is that instant on and incredibly fast resolution changing. Any time you have to interact with the monitor itself is just a snap and a pleasure to use.

All that stuff is second fiddle to the panel, image quality, input lag etc, but Asus has set the bar very high for those features so I hope Acer (and other mfgs) take notice.
 
I hope they start making more ultra wide screen displays so people stop doing multi-monitor setups for panoramic gaming. :p I never understand the joy of wide screen when there was even the slightest bit of bezel visible.
 
Yes, matte film belongs on monitors used in office buildings not light controlled gaming environments. I know people that didn't buy the Swift solely because of the film.

This x100. If this monitor turns up to be glossy (or at least have an option to be glossy) I will buy it right off the bat. Otherwise I'll probably just stick to my Eizo FG2421 and wait for an OLED option... in the far off future.
 
All that they had to do to have a real competitor to the FW900 was make it 16:10 and make it full-glossy... But they were unable to do that... I would even consider it if it was 16:10, as matte coats can be removed. Why would they not just make it 2560x1600?
 
I do not expect this to rival the FW900...rapidz7.

While this monitor will have ULMB, we should not expect blur reduction to be quite as good as high-performing TNs like the Rog Swift, and this is due to IPS/AHVA panels' slower pixel transition times. So a best-in-class CRT like the FW900 would remain superiod in my view, at least in terms of motion blur
 
I hope they start making more ultra wide screen displays so people stop doing multi-monitor setups for panoramic gaming. :p I never understand the joy of wide screen when there was even the slightest bit of bezel visible.

I understand that, but I hope standard flat 16:9 production won't suffer from that trend in the future, because not everyone uses monitors for panoramic gaming, think about those who rotate/portrait often for instance (I do), well; panoramic is a no-no.
 
I do not expect this to rival the FW900...rapidz7.

While this monitor will have ULMB, we should not expect blur reduction to be quite as good as high-performing TNs like the Rog Swift, and this is due to IPS/AHVA panels' slower pixel transition times. So a best-in-class CRT like the FW900 would remain superiod in my view, at least in terms of motion blur

Out of curiousity...if it's a 4ms response time panel, and 144Hz is about 7ms between frames, why would there be a difference in smoothness with a panel that has 2ms response time or even 1ms response time when you have ULMB active? If I understand it correctly, the increase in response time would result in a slight increase in input lag (3ms compared to ROG Swift) but the strobe and frame transition should be identical between the two as ULMB removes the reliance on the panel's own frame to frame transition and pixel persistence? Unless I'm missing something.
 
Last edited:
4ms response time is of course marketing bullshit thats why. the vast majority of pixels do not complete full transition in 4ms or less.
also hi hyper :)
 
I suspect this will be better than the swift in strobed mode (unless it has some glaring quality issue), but that the swift will still be better in gsync mode due to the much faster pixel response.
 
I do not expect this to rival the FW900...rapidz7.

While this monitor will have ULMB, we should not expect blur reduction to be quite as good as high-performing TNs like the Rog Swift, and this is due to IPS/AHVA panels' slower pixel transition times. So a best-in-class CRT like the FW900 would remain superiod in my view, at least in terms of motion blur

You'd be surprised. The Eizo has a "slow" VA panel and does very well with motion quality in strobing Turbo240 mode. MPRT ~2.2ms.

As for non-ULMB mode on the Acer, I do expect it to have a tad more blur in regular G-Sync mode versus the Swift. ULMB mode it should do quite well like the Eizo.
 
I can't find a US source to pre-order this. Anyone have a link to one?
 
Here's to hoping I see new NV cards pre-March so I can justify getting this bad boy and taking full advantage of it's capabilities.
 
Had problems with my Swift after 3 months, sent it back and Asus gave me a credit at the store i purchased it from($1K AUS). Seems that may have been a blessing in disguise, as now i am going to wait for this to spend the credit on i think.
 
Out of curiousity...if it's a 4ms response time panel, and 144Hz is about 7ms between frames, why would there be a difference in smoothness with a panel that has 2ms response time or even 1ms response time when you have ULMB active? If I understand it correctly, the increase in response time would result in a slight increase in input lag (3ms compared to ROG Swift) but the strobe and frame transition should be identical between the two as ULMB removes the reliance on the panel's own frame to frame transition and pixel persistence? Unless I'm missing something.

Basically because I am sceptical of the 4ms quoted response time being accurate. I fear they are either quoting the single fastest pixel/color transition of the bunch (rather than the real average) or otherwise quoting a number that is only possible with a very aggressive overdrive setting. If the former is true it would lead to regular motion blur at high refresh rates. If the latter is true it would lead to inverse ghosting (at any refresh rate, AFAIK.)

MORE than happy to be proven wrong but I'm gonna wait for a professional review or two. Who knows? Maybe I'm right about the above but the ULMB mode will render the final result eminently acceptable, à la the Eizo case that Vega cited
 
Exactly.

That said, ULMB + IPS is still going to be much much much better than just IPS. Presumably in a similar manner to the Eizo Foris VA panel with ULMB that was night-and-day compared to most VA's, though only 24inch 1080p.
 
Exactly.

That said, ULMB + IPS is still going to be much much much better than just IPS. Presumably in a similar manner to the Eizo Foris VA panel with ULMB that was night-and-day compared to most VA's, though only 24inch 1080p.

Ya, basically I am treating this new Acer like a size/resolution upgraded version of the Eizo. Just swap the Eizo's awesome VA blacks and contrast with the Acer's great color IPS and less contrast shift.

This baby should be on the street right when I get back from deployment and start of new computer build. Can't wait!
 
Ya, basically I am treating this new Acer like a size/resolution upgraded version of the Eizo. Just swap the Eizo's awesome VA blacks and contrast with the Acer's great color IPS and less contrast shift.

This baby should be on the street right when I get back from deployment and start of new computer build. Can't wait!

That's a nice thing to look forward to! :)
 
You'd be surprised. The Eizo has a "slow" VA panel and does very well with motion quality in strobing Turbo240 mode. MPRT ~2.2ms.

As for non-ULMB mode on the Acer, I do expect it to have a tad more blur in regular G-Sync mode versus the Swift. ULMB mode it should do quite well like the Eizo.

Interesting...didn't realise the MPRT test could determine the persistence after low motion blur modes like Turbo 240 have worked their magic..

My IPS gets 7.6ms when OC'd to 120Hz, which is faster than 120Hz's 8.333ms screen redraw time, but slower than 144Hz's 6.94ms redraw time that occurs at 144Hz. And of course, it's more than 3x slower than your 2.2ms.

I would point out though, that the MVA panel in your Eizo is probably a little faster than what we tend to get from the IPS/AHVA panels expected for this Acer. TFTCentral measured the Eizo as having an average response time of 8.4ms (6.9ms if you exclude 2 particularly slow colour transitions), with Turbo 240 turned off. That's consistent with NCX's rule of "take the declared response time and double it" to get the real response time. If we assume that rule also applies to the fastest 2560x1440 IPS screens, it means an effective average response time of 12-14ms, i.e., about 50% slower than the Eizo.

So again, it will be fascinating to see how this Acer does with ULMB enabled. However, if it's using a panel with an effective 12ms response time (which is what AU Optronics declares for their 144Hz AHVA panel, btw...), I hope that overdrive has not been applied to a level that renders the image unpleasant. As I understand it, ULMB will significantly mitigate motion blur from sample and hold, but it won't correct any overshoot that results from excessive overdrive.
 
Back
Top