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

Vega said:
Anyone that has a ULMB monitor now like the Swift can test to see if 100 Hz ULMB flickers too much. I've set monitors to 100 Hz for strobing and the flicker was pretty much un-perceivable. People like to embellish.
Click to expand...

You can't generalise - much like with PWM people have different eyes so 100Hz might ok for one person but not ok for someone else.
 
It's the ULMB, though. Setting the screen at 100 doesn't necessarily flicker but putting it on ULMB I see flicker on the Swift (at 100).
 
Honestly I doubt I'd run this display, or the Swift in ULMB mode. per TFT, look at the stats for ULMB at max brightness for all (Turbo240 for Eizo):

Acer - 100 Hz (pulse width 2.5ms) - Luminance (cd/m2) 110 - Black point .14 - Contrast Ratio 790.
Asus - 120 Hz (pulse width 1.9ms) - Luminance (cd/m2) 123 - Black point .14 - Contrast Ratio 876.
Eizo - 120Hz (pulse width 2.2ms) - Luminance (cd/m2) 258 - Black point .06 - Contrast Ratio 4290.

The Asus is better than the Acer for ULMB, but both get destroyed by the Eizo. The Eizo has dominating contrast and blacks, all the while able to provide over twice the brightness or more of both.

The ULMB of the Swift and Acer is just too dim, I'll most likely end up using the Acer in 144 Hz G-Sync mode.
 
neojam said:
@Michaelius
That SWEclockers review is new to me.
Btw can anyone translate this part:



Im very "allergic" to IPS-glow and grey blacks of IPS panels and prefer VA, so i would like to know what the "IPS Glow"-part of this review is about.
Click to expand...

It will have IPS glow you can see it on the demo of the screen, PC monitors crap...

I want a VA screen with strobing as well but the eizo foris I bought was junk.. Maybe I should try another one... But the foris I bought was horrible. Looks like the FG2421 is discontinued now.
 
I think EIZO should be releasing a new gaming monitor soon, VA panel like the FG2421 but at 1440p, lets hope they fix the issues that plagued the 1080p model.
 
TroyX said:
I think EIZO should be releasing a new gaming monitor soon, VA panel like the FG2421 but at 1440p, lets hope they fix the issues that plagued the 1080p model.
Click to expand...

You heard anything substantive on this or is it your guess?
 
TroyX said:
I think EIZO should be releasing a new gaming monitor soon, VA panel like the FG2421 but at 1440p, lets hope they fix the issues that plagued the 1080p model.
Click to expand...

Where did you get this info? 1440p strobing VA screen nice.
 
Sounds like daydreaming... like me seeing the recently released samsung 34" 21:9 curved 3440x1440 60hz VA and hoping that their 144hz one next yr will be VA as well.
 
Nothing on google for a 1440p eizo VA screen.. If we are going to make stuff up I also heard about a 27" 1440p 960hz oled coming out soon at £29.99p
 
Nicholars said:
Nothing on google for a 1440p eizo VA screen.. If we are going to make stuff up I also heard about a 27" 1440p 960hz oled coming out soon at £29.99p
Click to expand...

I can confirm that this is in fact FALSE. My sources said it's going to be £35.99p
 
Sancus said:
Is shopblt known reliable/trustworthy? I've never bought anything from them before, and wondering if I'd be better off just waiting for Amazon to carry it. Assuming they will.
Click to expand...

Yes they are assuming you aren't going to be returning it. Amazon has an unmatched return policy.

I have a high regard for shopblt because they are the only retailer I know of that didn't price gouge during the whole AMD mining craze earlier last year and also too backorders and shipped when they had stock.
 
Got the display today :)

The panel itself is perfect, no bleed/leakage, no dead pixels or anything annoying.
Really pleased with Acer's QA.
Being a fan of VA-tech I was worried about the IPS-glow and shitty blacks, but it's not an issue here (well there is some ips-glow when looking at dark images with lights off, but it's really minor. The blacks are OK as well).
Compared to Asus Swift that I had before, this screen is really an improvement, especially the colors (Im using tftcentral.co.uk color profile, but with 50% brightness. The suggested 24% were too dark for my preference).

Tried to play with ULMB on, but it dims the image too much. Playable in a dark room i guess, but during a day-time its kinda crappy. G-sync works great though.
At 80+fps is where the things start to look interesting and 144pfs looks amazing.

Tried Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes and Wolfenstein The New Order as well (both have 60fps lock). In such games you can hardly notice a difference, compared to a decent non G-sync display with V-Sync on.

So far the only annoyances:
- Included cables are too short :/
- Blue power LED is a WAY too bright and there is no option to dim it.

This thing is going to sell like pancakes.
 
Nicholars said:
I have some things called "Lightdims" get some of those they work well.
Click to expand...
Already "fixed" it with a piece of black tape ;)

The problem is, the LED located right between 2 buttons. Also the light leaks from the button slits. :(
 
Bah you are one lucky guy! Glad to hear the monitor arrived without any issues. Congrats and I can't wait to get mine :)
 
neojam said:
Got the display today :)
Compared to Asus Swift that I had before, this screen is really an improvement, especially the colors.
Click to expand...

And what about fluidity and blurriness? Did you notice any extra blurrines in comparison with Asus Swift? Or was it more or less the same?
neojam said:
G-sync works great. At 80+fps is where the things start to look interesting and 144pfs looks amazing.
Click to expand...
Theoretically, with activated G-sync moving image on Acer is supposed to become progressively more blurry when fps in games falls below 100 (The lower the fps - the lower the refresh rate and consequently higher GtG values). So was low fps only affecting fluidity or did it affect image clarity as well?
Can you compare moving image clarity in games at low fps values with G-sync on and off? (just your impressions). Hope it's nothing to worry about
 
neojam said:
Got the display today :)

So far the only annoyances:
- Included cables are too short :/
- Blue power LED is a WAY too bright and there is no option to dim it.

This thing is going to sell like pancakes.
Click to expand...

You meant hotcakes right?:confused::D
 
neojam said:
Got the display today :)

The panel itself is perfect, no bleed/leakage, no dead pixels or anything annoying.
Really pleased with Acer's QA.
Being a fan of VA-tech I was worried about the IPS-glow and shitty blacks, but it's not an issue here (well there is some ips-glow when looking at dark images with lights off, but it's really minor. The blacks are OK as well).
Compared to Asus Swift that I had before, this screen is really an improvement, especially the colors (Im using tftcentral.co.uk color profile, but with 50% brightness. The suggested 24% were too dark for my preference).

Tried to play with ULMB on, but it dims the image too much. Playable in a dark room i guess, but during a day-time its kinda crappy. G-sync works great though.
At 80+fps is where the things start to look interesting and 144pfs looks amazing.

Tried Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes and Wolfenstein The New Order as well (both have 60fps lock). In such games you can hardly notice a difference, compared to a decent non G-sync display with V-Sync on.

So far the only annoyances:
- Included cables are too short :/
- Blue power LED is a WAY too bright and there is no option to dim it.

This thing is going to sell like pancakes.
Click to expand...

Where did you purchase your display?

I thought it wasn't on release until Mid-April.
 
m51s said:
neojam said:
Got the display today :)
<snip>
Compared to Asus Swift that I had before, this screen is really an improvement, especially the colors
<snip>.
Click to expand...
And what about fluidity and blurriness? Did you notice any extra blurrines in comparison with Asus Swift? Or was it more or less the same?
neojam said:
<snip>
G-sync works great though.
At 80+fps is where the things start to look interesting and 144pfs looks amazing.
<snip>
Click to expand...
Theoretically, with activated G-sync moving image on Acer is supposed to become progressively more blurry when fps in games falls below 100 (The lower the fps - the lower the refresh rate and consequently higher GtG values). So was low fps only affecting fluidity or did it affect image clarity as well?
Can you compare moving image clarity in games at low fps values with G-sync on and off? (just your impressions). Hope it's nothing to worry about
Click to expand...


Yes that line of questioning goes back to these replies in this thread (including yours). I'm interested in knowing the answer to those question too.
mope54 said:
Only if you can maintain frames above 100 fps.

Remember all of these comparisons are when the frames are at 100 or 144. The Predator's pixel response depends on the framerate. The Swift pixel response is the same speed regardless of framerate.
Click to expand...

m51s said:
Agreed, I have just realized that this can be a problem - G-sync changes refresh rate depending on the framerate, so 60 fps will result in 60 Hz refresh rate and 8.7msGtG on Acer (and potentially even bigger GtG values with fps close to 30).
One solution is to deactivate G-sync if you can't maintain high enough fps. You lose G-sync fluidity (if any) and get tearing. But instead you have constant 144Hz refresh rate with 5.5 ms average GtG (low blur). I can live with tearing, not a problem for me.
Click to expand...

Drags said:
on the ROG Swift the refresh rate only impacted (improved) response times when running with OD off which surely noone is ever going to do anyway. With normal OD mode they confirmed in the review "The refresh rate doesn't have an impact on the response times here and it is the same at 60, 120 and 144Hz."

on the Acer though the refresh rate does impact response times and the overdrive control on all OD settings
Click to expand...

Personally I'd be aiming to get 100fps average with sli even if I had to turn some things down. Of course the framerate would still have highs and lows so the blur could potentially go from a soften/fuzz blur to smear blur at lower framerates with matched dynamic hz (which is what you are asking).
That's if I get one of the 21:9 3440x1440 144hz g-sync models much later (possibly the samsung rather than the acer though if samsung ends up releasing one in 2016). I'm still following this thread closely to see how the tech pans out since it should relate to the 21:9 models.
 
Last edited:
The same thing happened with the Swift. Europe got it first. I don't mind. We usually get first dibs on products. :cool:
 
This monitor is going to sell like
Tastemaker%20Funnel%20Cake.jpg
 
ShopBLT is now showing
We are not accepting any new orders for this item at this time, and this item will be removed from our site shortly. We have no information as to when we will be accepting more orders for this item. Please do not order this item.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...

Edit: Guess that was temporary as its showing back up.
 
Last edited:
Yes that line of questioning goes back to these replies in this thread (including yours). I'm interested in knowing the answer to those question too.
Click to expand...
I want real owners to share their impressions in order to get at least some notion of what gaming on Acer really feels like in terms of motion clarity at low fps with G-sync On (is there really anything to worry about). Right now it's all just theoretical abstractions.

By the way although Asus Swift's pixel response doesn't depend on refresh rate, perceived image clarity does (due to more sample-and-hold blur caused by low refresh rate). So it would be interesting to know:
- if there's any noticeable motion clarity loss on Asus Swift when in-game framerate drops below 60fps;
- and if deactivating G-sync and locking refresh rate at 144Hz can reduce blur/smear (presumably at the cost of losing some fluidity?)
So elvn, as a Swift owner – do you feel that with G-sync On motion clarity is affected by low framerate? Can you compare motion clarity at low fps with G-sync On and with G-sync Off at constant 144Hz?

Asus-Acer_pursuit_Hz.jpg
 
It doesn't feel like it adds more blur when gaming at 60fps and bellow with g-sync on.
Stable 60fps look pretty samey with g-sync on or with 144hz.
45-60fps looks more fluid/better with g-sync on.
 
I'd have to run some tests with the testufo at different hz. I prefer the text readability based test to the actual ufo one though.

If you are considering running without g-sync, you might want to check this article out to see the tradeoffs...
http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview/

Then there are further tradeoffs.. I don't run games at med-low frame rates (sub 100fps-hz) if I can help it, turning settings down as necessary, but I do use g-sync. I will say overall the highest framerate games look the tightest and their motion definition at very high framerates makes a huge difference as well (different than motion clarity). So using lower framerates you are losing out on a lot more than blur reduction. The questioned scenario implies blur increase periods during lower fps swings with g-sync on (60fps and even 30fp were mentioned) - but you would also be losing a lot of motion definition/motion path articulation ~smoothness, and possibly even animation cycle definition when you drop fps, especially below 100fps average which is a 5:3 ratio of motion definition vs 60hz-fps.
web-cyb.org 120hz-fps-compared

I just got a 2nd 780ti used along with some other hardware that I need to install and test asap (today) so I can be sure that the new card is solid, along with a few other projects, so I won't have time to do ufo test stuff right now. I can't delay the gpu install and testing in case I need to start refund procedures/paypal claim or whatever. The seller seems solid and the card looks brand new so I'm not expecting any problems though. Now where did I leave the bag that holds the rest of the cables to my modular PSU... :rolleyes:
 
elvn said:
If you are considering running without g-sync, you might want to check this article out to see the tradeoffs...
http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview/
Click to expand...
Thanks for the explanation and for the blurbusters link! I got all the answers there, no need to bother with tests:

With variable frame rates, the only side effect is variable motion blur (as seen in the above animation). We already know that lower framerates create more motion blur even at fixed refresh rates too (on a regular LCD), as shown at the+www.testufo.com+30fps-versus-60fps animation demo
Click to expand...

Summary: Low framerate introduces additional motion blur even with constant 144Hz refresh rate. Swift's motion clarity is also affected by low fps, but Acer will still be even more blurry due to higher GtG values at low refresh rates. Deactivating G-sync is not going to help - only makes motion less smooth and returns tearing.
 
I'm in the process of doing some monitor shopping, however, i have a really dumb question...what games are people playing that they can push over 60 fps on a 1440p/144hz monitor to fully reap the benefits of g-sync/free-sync?

I'm personally a graphics first kinda guy, so if I'm getting over 60 fps than my settings are too low or I'm playing the wrong game. That's just me though since I don't do any serious tournament gaming.
 
I just got a 2nd 780ti sc used off the for sale forums here for $350 (the seller paid paypal fee and shipping so really not a bad deal overall).
Now at "very high" settings on shadow of mordor, with the blur turned off but fxaa on (so technically "custom" setting"), sli forced in the nvidia control panel, and the 100fps limit unlocked in the cfg file -
I'm getting 108 - 128 fps normally (120's+ running around). 101 - 108 fps in the most messy battles, in some narrow places high 130's (144 is the max with g-sync btw). For some reason when I shoot the bee-hives the fps drops a lot until they are gone though, idk if it's a physx-type thing. The game is running very glassy smooth I'm loving it. Before I had to keep everything on medium with single card to get 70 - 75fps (I went past high to very high now, minus movement blur setting). I'm not running the xtreme texture pack though in case you were wondering.
That is with my cpu overclocked to 4.6GHz. When I first installed the card and tested it I turned the overclock off and ran the cpu at defaults and was getting 70 - 90 (->100) fps at high settings in shadow of mordor(not very high).
I had borderlands2 still installed in steam so I thought that would be a good test too since it can be very demanding as well. I was getting similar numbers. Around 128 fps normally, 104 in heavier battles with physx stuff going off, 144 in easy to render areas (g-sync max), and on occasional extreme scenic vista distances (view distance and objects viewable in distance maxed) it would drop to 70fps briefly. That's at high+ settings (most things on the max of "high") with physx on low (out of 3 steps, low-med-high). I haven't tested borderlands2 at 4.6ghz yet so it might get even more fps or allow higher settings.

forums.evga.com GTX-780Ti-Benchmarks-1x4x-SLI-Work-in-Progress

The graphics ceiling really is quite arbitrary. You can go way over it with hdr, texture packs, mods, and downsampling 4k or even 8k, etc.. which some ultra settings sort of do more or less with supersampling. The challenge for devs is whittling games down to "real time" frame rates, not the other way around. The graphics ceiling could easily be many times higher than it is on any game, as mods and downsampling prove. There are screen shot forums full of super high detail screenshots made with massive downsampling and other high graphics mods that make gorgeous wallpaper/still shots. However, you don't play a screen-shot.
In my opinion, you aren't at a global "ultra" setting, not even "high setting", if you are 60fps average or lower.
This is a graphic I made which is a hypothetical graphics settings panel from a game which is aware of the framerates your gpu gets, and would adjust the frame rate slider according to your other settings.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top