Tuesday, November 12th 2019
Acer Unveils Predator CG437KP monitor: 43" VA, 4K, 144 Hz, Adaptive Sync, 1000 nits
(UPDATE: Acer has now launched the monitor) Acer at a special event unveiled their upcoming monitor that blurs the line between a television and a PC monitor. The Predator CG437KP makes use of a 43" VA panel (90% DCI-P3 coverage and low Delta E<1 color accuracy) with a 4K resolution. As if the size wasn't an impressive spec alone, Acer really have gone out of their way to make this a veritable Predator monitor, with 144 Hz refresh rates. The monitor also comes with Adaptive Sync support for both AMD FreeSync and NVIDIA G-Sync and over HDMI for compatibility with current and future consoles. There's a maximum 1000 nits brightness, which brings VESA's DisplayHDR 1000 certification to the table.
I/O stands at 3x HDMI (likely to support all of those consoles users that are looking at this diagonal size might have), 2x DisplayPort 1.4 for actual Active Sync users, 1x USB 3.1-C, 2xUSB 3.0 and 2xUSB 2.0. There's even a remote control. The Acer Predator CG437KP is now available in the US at $1,499.99 MSRP.
Sources:
4KFilme.de, xiaomist.com
I/O stands at 3x HDMI (likely to support all of those consoles users that are looking at this diagonal size might have), 2x DisplayPort 1.4 for actual Active Sync users, 1x USB 3.1-C, 2xUSB 3.0 and 2xUSB 2.0. There's even a remote control. The Acer Predator CG437KP is now available in the US at $1,499.99 MSRP.
57 Comments on Acer Unveils Predator CG437KP monitor: 43" VA, 4K, 144 Hz, Adaptive Sync, 1000 nits
Unlikely that VESA would put an unreleased monitor on there when it's only JUST been announced, and also rather daft of Acer to say they've got it certified when they aren't at least extremely confident it will be. But we shall see in due course.
Yes, pros use more expensive stuff. But that's because of integrated calibrators, high quality hardware LUT and better electronics overall. It's not an IPS vs VA thing.
Why is VA unsuitable you ask? Because it's a simple fact (backed up by plenty of evidence) that VA has worse viewing angles, worse color production and worse response times. You surely can't be disputing that? VA can never be a true match for a top end IPS panel which can do all of these things better. And that's why the pro level monitors will always go with IPS... it just does a better all round job, and even though they probably could work with a VA panel and make it damn good, why would they settle for second best?
Not all IPS monitors are created equal of course. I'm sure there are junk IPS monitors out there which might be bested by top end VA ones, but that's hardly the point. The fact remains that IPS monitors are used predominantly by those who require critical colour accuracy (certainly in print), and the manufacturers make them exclusively with IPS panels. What makes you think VA is suitable when it is quite evident that the industry itself doesn't??
You're basically saying you know better than the entire monitor industry... yet have no evidence yourself to support this mighty claim, other than a couple of monitors with similar colour spaces. Which in and of itself doesn't carry as much weight as you seem to think. Panel bit-rate comes in to play... or rather the quality in that respect, which can vary massively, but true-10 bit is a necessity at the top level, especially when working with 12/14-bit content. At the top level, 8-bit+FRC just won't cut it. Also, 3D LUT, calibrators etc... all in-built features in many top end IPS panels, but in no VA panel that I can see. Mmmm... I wonder why? Oh yes, it's that pesky conspiracy, silly me.
"The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."
You are suggesting that the below doesn't meet that definition regards the proposition that IPS is more capable than VA?
1) Superior colour reproduction (countless articles and evidentiary research to support this, widely acknowledged and accepted by those in the know)
2) Superior viewing angles (not remotely open for debate)
3) Every high-end colour critical monitor utilising IPS panel technology (clearly indicative of something about the qualities that IPS possesses)
4) Every bit of advice pertaining to colour critical work written by industry/tech professionals recommending IPS for this use-case
5) No VA panel on the market with same high-end specs as those IPS monitors targeted at professionals for colour critical work
Evidence for VA being as capable of what IPS can do (as you claim):
I'm not going to bother with the rest.
www.eizoglobal.com/library/basics/difference_in_image_quality/index.html
www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1890-panel-comparison-tn-ips-pls-va-crt
4k.com/va-display-panels-vs-ips-display-panels-in-4k-hdr-tvs-what-you-need-to-know-19275-2/
This is just a sample of course. I'll await your evidentiary links demonstrating that VA doesn't have worse viewing angles and colour reproduction than IPS. That should be interesting.
Oh, and if you don't want to read anything, here's a pretty picture...
Viewing angles seem to be a bit better for IPS (I wasn't aware of that), but here's what Eizo says about that: "The display on a VA panel. Compared with the IPS panel the screen is a little whitish and the chromaticity has slipped, but it is a satisfactory viewing angle for actual use"
Plus, I want my 30 minutes of replying to you back.
The bottom line is that IPS offers true colour accuracy on par with or better than equivalent VA panels, but then surpasses it by offering better viewing angles and the fact there are no equivalent 10/12-bit VA panels being made anyway, which gives IPS the clear advantage. Why are no equivalent VA panels being made? I have no idea. Maybe they tried and it didn't work, maybe it was too costly. But ultimately, why would they need to when IPS is already doing such a great job?
Wherever you look for advice on this matter, IPS is ALWAYS indicated as the choice for colour critical work. Now, you may not consider this 'evidence', but it's indicative of something, and unless you DO believe there is a conspiracy against VA, and when you factor the actual undeniable evidence about viewing angles and the lack of 10/12-bit VA panels in monitors, then I am really not sure what footing you think you're on here?? It wouldn't even be fair to say you're on thin ice because you've literally presented nothing to support your assertion that VA is equal to IPS... instead, it's like you've just thrown out the challenge to be proven wrong, for reasons I cannot comprehend, with not even a shred of evidence to kick start a debate.
I am waiting for good 32’’ 4K 100Hz or 120Hz monitor.
I know that depends on your needs and desk space but these gaming monitors have some ridiculous pricing when you take a step back.
We're both in for some waiting :D