# Acer Predator XB271HU bmiprz 144-165 Hz



## Inle (Jul 25, 2017)

The Acer Predator XB271HU is an impressive gaming monitor equipped with a 27" 1440p IPS panel that can be overclocked from its native 144 Hz to 165 Hz. Absolute smoothness of in-game action is ensured by the built-in G-Sync module, and its ultra-thin screen bezels make it as immersive as they are downright pretty to look at.

*Show full review*


----------



## natr0n (Jul 25, 2017)

Bleeding like a hemophiliac on this one.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jul 25, 2017)

What, no deduction for a B in power efficiency? 

Also, the screen edges aren't that thin, a lot of screens from the past couple of years are the same or even thinner. Although you do get the nice fat black bar as part of the panel now instead of it being a fat ugly bezel...


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jul 25, 2017)

natr0n said:


> Bleeding like a hemophiliac on this one.


----------



## spooh (Jul 25, 2017)

Gamma 2.2 could be desired in some professional uses. For most people sRGB gamma is a lot more useful (like it might be the case here).


----------



## jabbadap (Jul 25, 2017)

Was it first review of yours Inle? At least it is first monitor review that I remember seeing in tpu. And it's quite good, well written and thorough 



spooh said:


> Gamma 2.2 could be desired in some professional uses. For most people sRGB gamma is a lot more useful (like it might be the case here).



Well yeah it would, but this monitor is targeted for gamers.


----------



## Manu_PT (Jul 25, 2017)

Very good review as usual on TPU on any piece of hardware. I just wish you guys could get an osiloscope like prad does, so you could measure input lag accurately. Is the only thing missing from your reviews. And is the most important thing to me when I buy a monitor. Other than that, this is a very good monitor for gaming and this review covers it all.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Jul 25, 2017)

It looks nice and it's great for gaming but I still prefer mine


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 25, 2017)

Manu_PT said:


> measure input lag accurately


We have lots of plans for more complex measurements. Keep the feedback/suggestions/ideas coming please.


----------



## Ed_1 (Jul 25, 2017)

So on the bleeding and uniformity , does the Asus comparable 27" ISP Gsync ( ROG Swift PG279Q) is the same or is it better as they both use same panels?

Also, seems market is dead on ISP 1440 high refresh monitors, there all pushing 4k but I find it hard to believe users will buy these as graphic card needs to be top end ones or even SLI if you want like 120 fps.


----------



## Inle (Jul 25, 2017)

jabbadap said:


> Was it first review of yours Inle? At least it is first monitor review that I remember seeing in tpu. And it's quite good, well written and thorough



Thank you for your kind words! It's not my first review for TPU, I've been doing pretty much all of the headset reviews starting from late April. I've been testing and reviewing monitors for the past 15 years, but this is the first one I've published in English. And what a honor to have it published on TPU, woah 

Like W1zz already said, we will continue to refine the testing methodology in order to make our monitor reviews even better. Your input is much appreciated!


----------



## Inle (Jul 25, 2017)

Ed_1 said:


> So on the bleeding and uniformity , does the Asus comparable 27" ISP Gsync is the same or is it better as they both use same panels?



My time with the Asus ROG Swift PG279Q was fairly limited and it was about a year ago, but from what I saw, the Acer Predator XB271HU holds up a bit better in both of those aspects. It would be awesome to take it for a proper spin and detailed testing - something we'll definitely try to arrange!


----------



## Ed_1 (Jul 25, 2017)

Inle said:


> My time with the Asus ROG Swift PG279Q was fairly limited and it was about a year ago, but from what I saw, the Acer Predator XB271HU holds up a bit better in both of those aspects. It would be awesome to take it for a proper spin and detailed testing - something we'll definitely try to arrange!


Thanks, it be good to revisit Asus ROG Swift PG279Q to see if improvements have happened   from launch time, as it got good reviews from what I remember.


----------



## Manu_PT (Jul 25, 2017)

W1zzard said:


> We have lots of plans for more complex measurements. Keep the feedback/suggestions/ideas coming please.


 
Great news! Imagine if you guys had an input lag database, using those complex measurements. Would be awesome to make tpu even better.


----------



## Wayoutwilly (Jul 25, 2017)

Personally I use Dell monitors for as long as I can remember, and really have to say I'm not inclined to switch. But, and there always is a but, when I see displays like this, there is an itch. OK, so, I might have to buy a new graphic card every season (you have to pump out 144, or more, FPS, that ain't walk in the park), but I miss the high FPS count of the old CRTs (rest in peace Sony G200, you will be forever missed).


But I digress. Nice work on the review, I'm glad it is picture heavy - saves me the time to go on Amazon and ask all sorts of stupid questions that somebody will answer wrong...

And if you continue with monitor reviews, and you should because that is the only piece of IT equipment I have 100 percent contact time with (you don't even hold your mouse all day...), don't go just on uber high end gaming stuff; it is nice to see some main stream, or big screen size lower refresh rate (*cough* Dell *cough* curved one *cough*) when you have to get some shit done... So keep up the good work.


And yeah, would you have calibration profiles (for the monitors tested) for download every time or was this one just for show?


----------



## trog100 (Jul 25, 2017)

i have the asus verion i have been using it for quite a while now.. 

i am gonna have to admit that my eyes and brain are too old to appreciate super high refresh rates.. i genuinely cant detect any "smoothness" difference between lets say 70 fps and 120 fps..

good luck to those that can but i for sure cant.. he he..

trog


----------



## coolernoob (Jul 25, 2017)

my eyes bled when I was checking out that bleeding test results.... I mean that black (when brigthess was more than 0%) was more white than Michael Jackon skin


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Jul 25, 2017)

I was just recently thinking that monitor reviews were a big missing area on TPU. 

Edit: Since this is the first monitor review on TPU, I wish there had been a discussion about TN vs. IPS, which one is better for a gaming monitor and why.


----------



## Inle (Jul 25, 2017)

Wayoutwilly said:


> And yeah, would you have calibration profiles (for the monitors tested) for download every time or was this one just for show?



We'll add them to every review


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 25, 2017)

Inle said:
			
		

> The Acer Predator XB271HU is an impressive gaming monitor equipped with a 27" 1440p *IPS panel *that can be overclocked from its native 144 Hz to 165 Hz. Absolute smoothness of in-game action is ensured by the built-in G-Sync module, and its ultra-thin screen bezels make it as immersive as they are downright pretty to look at.



Its marketed as an IPS panel like several others but its not, Its an AU Optronics AHVA.

One of the links you provided also points it out.



			
				Inle said:
			
		

> The Acer Predator XB271HU features an AU Optronics M270DAN02.6 IPS panel.



Twice

Overview



			
				Panelook said:
			
		

> Display Mode: *AHVA*, Normally Black, Transmissive



Specs



			
				Panelook said:
			
		

> Optical Mode: *AHVA*, Normally Black, Transmissive



Might want to point that out to the readers that they are in fact getting a AHVA instead of an IPS even if its a decent AHVA, great for gaming.


----------



## Inle (Jul 25, 2017)

Xzibit said:


> Its marketed as an IPS panel like several others but its not, Its an AU Optronics AHVA.
> 
> Might want to point that out to the readers that they are in fact getting a AHVA instead of an IPS even if its a decent AHVA, great for gaming.



I tried to avoid bringing any confusion into the matter, since AHVA is just a name used by AU Optronics for their IPS panels. In other words, AHVA panels use in-plane switching (IPS) to display the picture. It's a horrible name, since we also have VA panels. Because of that, many users confuse AHVA with VA, thinking AHVA is actually VA, and not IPS. And I'd really hate to call it "IPS-like", because that would only bring more confusion.

Even Acer themselves didn't bother calling it AHVA or IPS-like, simply opting for "IPS" instead: https://www.acer.com/ac/en/GB/content/predator-model/UM.HX1EE.005


----------



## trog100 (Jul 25, 2017)

thebluebumblebee said:


> I was just recently thinking that monitor reviews were a big missing area on TPU.
> 
> Edit: Since this is the first monitor review on TPU, I wish there had been a discussion about TN vs. IPS, which one is better for a gaming monitor and why.



i has a 144 hrz TN acer panel.. it was fine for gaming but i got rid of it because of its sh-t viewing angles and none of my photo collection looked right on it.. 

trog


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 25, 2017)

Inle said:


> I tried to avoid bringing any confusion into the matter, since AHVA is just a name used by AU Optronics for their IPS panels. In other words, AHVA panels use in-plane switching (IPS) to display the picture. It's a horrible name, since we also have VA panels. Because of that, many users confuse AHVA with VA, thinking AHVA is actually VA, and not IPS. And I'd really hate to call it "IPS-like", because that would only bring more confusion.
> 
> Even Acer themselves didn't bother calling it AHVA or IPS-like, simply opting for "IPS" instead: https://www.acer.com/ac/en/GB/content/predator-model/UM.HX1EE.005



They cant reach the high contrast VAs can but they carry over the blue tint (Not the glow), That's one of the gripes you see on ASUS and ACER models that carry the "IPS" AHVA panel. 

*AUO AHVA. *Its AUO take on IPS. I haven't seen any docs saying its IPS tho.

Just to be clear call them what you want but other reviewers have been pointing the distinction out since AUO introduced the panels to market.


----------



## Tomorrow (Jul 26, 2017)

natr0n said:


> Bleeding like a hemophiliac on this one.


Lower brightness - lower bleed. I use the P279Q that uses the same panel. 45% brightness. Plus the fact that pictures also severly overblow the effect.
Personally i think it's acceptable compromise to get all features in one panel. Remember - no panel is perfect. If you get no bleed you will have some other major problem or feature missing.


TheLostSwede said:


> Also, the screen edges aren't that thin, a lot of screens from the past couple of years are the same or even thinner. Although you do get the nice fat black bar as part of the panel now instead of it being a fat ugly bezel...


Only the design/media screens have thinner bezels. When it comes to gaming monotors these are some of the thinnest.


Ed_1 said:


> So on the bleeding and uniformity , does the Asus comparable 27" ISP Gsync ( ROG Swift PG279Q) is the same or is it better as they both use same panels?.


They are both the same. Just some ergonomic and design differences. Personally i think ASUS's OSD is much better both in terms of logic and control (joystick) than Acer's. The panel is the same.


Ed_1 said:


> Also, seems market is dead on ISP 1440 high refresh monitors, there all pushing 4k but I find it hard to believe users will buy these as graphic card needs to be top end ones or even SLI if you want like 120 fps.


Not dead. Rather these panels are incredibly difficult and expensive to make and only AU Optronics is making them currently (1440p, IPS, 165Hz). Although lately LG has also started producing some 100Hz+ UltraWide variants.


coolernoob said:


> my eyes bled when I was checking out that bleeding test results.... I mean that black (when brigthess was more than 0%) was more white than Michael Jackon skin


Pictures in this case are illustrative only and do not represent what you would see in a dark room with dark content on screen (wich in itself is a limited circumstance).


----------



## altermere (Jul 26, 2017)

Is the quality control still atrocious on these panels? I had to return my ViewSonic XG2703-GS because of the dust under the coating, all three replacements had it. It's a shame really, I was actually satisfied with picture quality and glow amount.


----------



## arbiter (Jul 26, 2017)

I have owned my Acer xb271 for little over a year now, the bleeding issue is very minor least from what i seen. Only time really noticed it is pretty much a black screen in a very dark room. Have light in the room even with a dark scene its pretty much not noticeable at all. I have done some calibration on it using settings reported on sites which you can google to find.



Ed_1 said:


> So on the bleeding and uniformity , does the Asus comparable 27" ISP Gsync ( ROG Swift PG279Q) is the same or is it better as they both use same panels?
> Also, seems market is dead on ISP 1440 high refresh monitors, there all pushing 4k but I find it hard to believe users will buy these as graphic card needs to be top end ones or even SLI if you want like 120 fps.



I have a gtx1080 and find new games can only 60-100fps that is with some settings turned down. Takes a lot of power to drive 1440p as it is.


----------



## silapakorn (Jul 26, 2017)

Acer probably has the poorest quality panel among all gaming brands. My XB270HU (the predecessor to this one) also has horrible bleeding and 4 dead pixels that show up after 1 year of use (which means it's non-returnable now).


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 26, 2017)

For anyone wondering, "BMIPRZ" is the model - the "B" signifies an IPS panel, while the "AMIPRZ" model uses a TN panel.


----------



## Liam_francois (Jul 26, 2017)

Hello, please tell me, where can I download the profile that you got?


----------



## Inle (Jul 26, 2017)

Liam_francois said:


> Hello, please tell me, where can I download the profile that you got?



Here:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Acer/Predator_XB271HU/6.html

There are two download links under 'Picture Quality After Calibration'


----------



## Liam_francois (Jul 26, 2017)

thank you very much! And what are the settings in the monitor menu?


----------



## Fx (Jul 26, 2017)

Thank you for reviewing this. I've been watching this monitor for 6 months. Now that I know Vega's performance, I'll be skipping AMD this cycle for an 1080ti and be picking this monitor up.


----------



## Agony (Jul 26, 2017)

can I ask ? What's the point of 144hz monitor on games ?
I use a single Strix 1080ti +7700k and I can't get over 70 fps on modern games at max settings and 3k-4k resolutions ?
So to go over 144fps and also have minimum 144fps resolution must be low settings must be low resolution so why are these called gaming if you play games at these settings ?
I was thinking that maybe 2x1080ti can go at 150-180 fps for those monitors and max settings and good resolution but does all SLI works great for all modern games ?
I really want to know the point of these monitors that I don't get ... are these monitors for older games ?


----------



## Tomorrow (Jul 26, 2017)

Agony said:


> can I ask ? What's the point of 144hz monitor on games ?
> I use a single Strix 1080ti +7700k and I can't get over 70 fps on modern games at max settings and 3k-4k resolutions ?
> So to go over 144fps and also have minimum 144fps resolution must be low settings must be low resolution so why are these called gaming if you play games at these settings ?
> I was thinking that maybe 2x1080ti can go at 150-180 fps for those monitors and max settings and good resolution but does all SLI works great for all modern games ?
> I really want to know the point of these monitors that I don't get ... are these monitors for older games ?


Not nesseceraly. It is game specific. Some games achieve 144fps on max or close to max settings. Others require turning down settings. Thankfully i know of no games that you have to play at low settings at 1440p to get 60fps+
And high refreshrate and high resolution help outside the games too. You can't game 24/7. It's inevitable that you do other stuff too and that suits monitors like this also very well - being IPS and large screen.

Forget 4K gaming. That wont be viable for several generations yet unless you significantly turn down settings. And you won't buy 1080Ti and a 4K screen to play with medium settings. 1440p is a good compromise between age old 1080p and unattainable 4K.


----------



## trog100 (Jul 26, 2017)

Agony said:


> can I ask ? What's the point of 144hz monitor on games ?
> I use a single Strix 1080ti +7700k and I can't get over 70 fps on modern games at max settings and 3k-4k resolutions ?
> So to go over 144fps and also have minimum 144fps resolution must be low settings must be low resolution so why are these called gaming if you play games at these settings ?
> I was thinking that maybe 2x1080ti can go at 150-180 fps for those monitors and max settings and good resolution but does all SLI works great for all modern games ?
> I really want to know the point of these monitors that I don't get ... are these monitors for older games ?



i have the asus version of the reviewed monitor.. i have mine set at 120 hrz and run a frame rate cap set at 75.. as i have often said i personally cant tell the difference between 75 fps and 140.. and yep my hardware is capable of quite high frames rates with some games..

even with a pair of 1080 TI cards i would probably cap at 100 fps.. mostly people just lust after what they cant have.. and people buy high numbers..

trog

i bought my asus monitor for its good viewing angles and better colour than my previous TN gaming panel.. i certainly dont need or use its possible 165 hrz refresh rate..


----------



## Beastie (Jul 26, 2017)

Agony said:


> can I ask ? What's the point of 144hz monitor on games ?
> I use a single Strix 1080ti +7700k and I can't get over 70 fps on modern games at max settings and 3k-4k resolutions ?
> So to go over 144fps and also have minimum 144fps resolution must be low settings must be low resolution so why are these called gaming if you play games at these settings ?
> I was thinking that maybe 2x1080ti can go at 150-180 fps for those monitors and max settings and good resolution but does all SLI works great for all modern games ?
> I really want to know the point of these monitors that I don't get ... are these monitors for older games ?


 Higher fps makes games easier. Depends on the game of course.

 Also higher fps make games look smoother.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 26, 2017)

Beastie said:


> Higher fps makes games easier. Depends on the game of course.
> 
> Also higher fps make games look smoother.



Consistent FPS make games smooth.

At a higher hz the inconsistencies (variations) are less noticeable.


----------



## Beastie (Jul 26, 2017)

Xzibit said:


> Consistent FPS make games smooth.



I agree with both your points.

We need to define smooth with respect to fps!


----------



## deu (Jul 26, 2017)

Ed_1 said:


> So on the bleeding and uniformity , does the Asus comparable 27" ISP Gsync ( ROG Swift PG279Q) is the same or is it better as they both use same panels?
> 
> Also, seems market is dead on ISP 1440 high refresh monitors, there all pushing 4k but I find it hard to believe users will buy these as graphic card needs to be top end ones or even SLI if you want like 120 fps.



Yes: ASUS uses the same panel. Some people say that Acer actually bins the panels better. (whether or not it is true i dont know) I own the Acer monitor, and trust me it is gorgeous!) Worth every penny!)


----------



## deu (Jul 26, 2017)

natr0n said:


> Bleeding like a hemophiliac on this one.



SOME of the panels have the bleeding some dont  Mine have a LITTLE in the bottom right but its not something i notice in any situation besides pitchblack-only. But if you get one with too much its a return


----------



## deu (Jul 27, 2017)

I have the screen and the bleed is almost non existent. The thing is that SOME of the panels produced have some bad bleeding but alot dont. So its down to panel lottery.


----------



## trog100 (Jul 27, 2017)

Beastie said:


> I agree with both your points.
> 
> We need to define smooth with respect to fps!



how about a rock solid g-synced 78 fps (as shown by fraps) no ups no downs.. would that be considered smooth.. at 1440 that is what i see in every game i play.. currently its battlefield 1..

and dare i ask the question.. where does 4 K fit in here with this "smoothness" stuff.. being as most folks will be struggling to get 60 fps..

trog


----------



## Inle (Jul 27, 2017)

Fx said:


> Thank you for reviewing this. I've been watching this monitor for 6 months. Now that I know Vega's performance, I'll be skipping AMD this cycle for an 1080ti and be picking this monitor up.



I have to admit I did the same. Tested it, reviewed it and decided to buy it  That rarely happens but I simply couldn't part ways with it. The gaming experience is staggering.

To reply to a couple of other comments. You don't need to hit 144 or more fps to fully utilize everything this monitor has to offer. You want to stay within the G-Sync range, which goes up to 165 Hz/FPS. However, you'll also get the full G-Sync experience with a lower framerate, as the G-Sync range starts from 35 Hz/FPS. The G-Sync eliminates stutter and screen tearing. But it's the high refresh rate, combined with a high framerate, that give you that insane aim accuracy and perfect feeling of smoothness. The more FPS you get, the higher refresh rate you'll get as well, since the G-Sync module basically makes sure that the refresh rate and the framerate are in sync. For me, the difference between 70 and 90 FPS/Hz is massive. And the overall smoothness and accuracy keep improving as FPS rises. I can still feel improvements between ie. 100 and 120 FPS. But after 120 FPS/Hz, it becomes increasingly hard for me to notice a big difference. Some eSports pros claim they still feel the difference up and over 200 Hz/FPS. Even though I did do a bit of competitive gaming, I guess I never reached that level 

Of course, when you're not gaming, your framerate/refresh rate will be whatever you set it to in the Nvidia Control Panel, so 144 or 165 Hz. Thanks to that, you won't believe how accurately and smoothly your cursor moves across the screen. Extremely useful for more demanding Photoshop work, CAD/CAM apps and such. 

And another thing worth noting - 1440p contains waaaaay less pixels than 4K (try multiplying the numbers). My GTX 1080 runs Battlefield 1 on High at around 100-120 FPS. On 4K, I'd probably get half that. That's one of the reasons I love 1440p for gaming - the picture is sharp, but you don't have to go SLI or Titan to get 100+ FPS at high settings in AAA games.


----------



## Danny_HR (Jul 27, 2017)

Thanks for this review. Very thorough and on point.
I was looking at this monitor for a while now, and this might really push me over the edge.

If I do indeed get it, that profile will most definitely be of use, so thanks again.


----------



## trog100 (Jul 27, 2017)

i would think a big question remains unanswered for a lot of folks.. very relatively and subjectively speaking which is best for gaming.. high refresh rates and high frame rates at 1440 or low refresh rates and low frame rates at  4 K.. ?

the other thing that i would really love to know.. i cant tell the difference between lets say a g-synced 75 fps and 120 fps it all seems equally smooth to me.. i do admit to probably being a fair bit older than the reviewer and none of my bits work quite as well as they used to do and my kill rate in BF1 aint that clever.. he he

trog


----------



## Inle (Jul 27, 2017)

trog100 said:


> i would think a big question remains unanswered for a lot of folks.. very relatively and subjectively speaking which is best for gaming.. high refresh rates and high frame rates at 1440 or low refresh rates and low frame rates at  4 K.. ?
> trog



That's easy: high framerate + high refresh rate @ 1440p is better, hands down, no question about it


----------



## Tomorrow (Jul 27, 2017)

Indeed. Most won't even notice 4K but i bet they will notice the performance drop it causes. While everyone notices smoother mouse movement on high refreshrate.


----------



## Wayoutwilly (Jul 27, 2017)

trog100 said:


> i would think a big question remains unanswered for a lot of folks.. very relatively and subjectively speaking which is best for gaming.. high refresh rates and high frame rates at 1440 or low refresh rates and low frame rates at  4 K.. ?
> 
> the other thing that i would really love to know.. i cant tell the difference between lets say a g-synced 75 fps and 120 fps it all seems equally smooth to me.. i do admit to probably being a fair bit older than the reviewer and none of my bits work quite as well as they used to do and my kill rate in BF1 aint that clever.. he he
> 
> trog



I also have to admit to not being young anymore, but I always feel lower and smooth vs high and jerky - if we remove a low FOV as the worst offender when it comes to motion sicknes in games (first person games mostly), smooth 30 FPS is better, for me, than jerky 60 FPS. Microstutters are not only driving me crazy but sooner or later I get sick. So, as a gentleman of certain age , I would always go 1440p with smooth frame rate over 4K with jerky one (I game on 1440p with GeForce 970 and still is quite OK - GeForce 1070 would be better but that ship had sailed).


----------



## Beastie (Jul 27, 2017)

trog100 said:


> how about a rock solid g-synced 78 fps (as shown by fraps) no ups no downs.. would that be considered smooth.. at 1440 that is what i see in every game i play.. currently its battlefield 1..
> 
> and dare i ask the question.. where does 4 K fit in here with this "smoothness" stuff.. being as most folks will be struggling to get 60 fps..
> 
> trog


 What looks best is subjective, for me 78fps is good but I can see a definite improvement between 78 and 120.

 Also I find that if the card is maxed out with gsync on, the minor constant variation in fps doesn't affect the percieved smoothness, not unless there is a glitch and the game slows right down.

 So I tend to just let eveything go flat out. Heck, my GPU is running pretty much factory settings and never overheats, why not?

 I don't run maximum AA in every game, for example I'd rather have the fps in project cars, it's worth about 2 sec a lap on the Nurburgring to turn the AA down with my GPU .


----------



## trog100 (Jul 28, 2017)

Beastie said:


> What looks best is subjective, for me 78fps is good but I can see a definite improvement between 78 and 120.
> 
> Also I find that if the card is maxed out with gsync on, the minor constant variation in fps doesn't affect the percieved smoothness, not unless there is a glitch and the game slows right down.
> 
> ...



flat out my pair 980 TI cards are a pair of room heaters.. i knew they would be when i bought them..

i cap at 75 fps which for reasons unknown to me shows 78 fps in fraps.. i have no reasons (for me at least) to run higher.. if i only had one card i wouldnt bother there would be no heat problem.. i also dont bother running things like AA maxed out..

 i do have heat and noise problems with the two cards running flat out.. 78 fps seem perfectly smooth to me.. i dont get stutters or any of the other problems i so often read about.. currently my 7700K at 4.8 ghz hits 90 C when playing battlefield 1 for any length of time.. at 5 ghz it would hit 100 C..

my systems only real problem is it generates too much heat.. its down to one simple thing.. a pair of room heater graphics cards in SLI.. hence my frame rate cap.. i dont work them any harder than i have to.. 

so far i have not found a game that at 1440 i cant maintain the constant 78 fps.. one day i might.. he he

trog

ps.. i do honestly think (twitch pro gamers apart) that the benefits from super high refresh rates are being exaggerated but then again i think the benefits from 4 K are being exaggerated.. but reviews do tend to do this for higher end gear..


----------



## arbiter (Aug 7, 2017)

trog100 said:


> ps.. i do honestly think (twitch pro gamers apart) that the benefits from super high refresh rates are being exaggerated but then again i think the benefits from 4 K are being exaggerated.. but reviews do tend to do this for higher end gear..


Super high as in 200+ yes, but around 144hz is the sweet spot for it. You can easily see difference between 60 to 120-144. After that its hard and pretty much pointless less you are a pro competitive gamer to need over that. I have owned this monitor for 15 month's now, only bad thing about it is its bit expensive but too me its been worth it but a lot of people won't agree with that.


----------



## Liam_Francais (Oct 19, 2017)

Thanks for the review. nowhere described RGB value after calibration.


----------

