Acer Announces Predator X25 Monitor: 25", 1080p, 360 Hz

[cucker tarlson]

aha.
and does the 360hz one have smearing and slow pixel response ?

I'm not saying I'm buying it.I'm saying if I had one I'd prolly enjoy it very much.

Big fan of VA, but it has drawbacks too, smearing being a notable one, the weak G2G in darker hues is definitely a step down from what IPS can do. But yes... blacks and static contrast are king on this tech.

I'm a big fan of picking whatever I want when it comes to a monitor.

picking a cpu/gpu - you get the numbers in a chart.
a monitor - that's only your personal preference.

 

[Vayra86]

"While high refresh rates were typically reserved for TNs, more manufacturers are producing IPS panels with refresh rates of 240 Hz. For example, the 27-inch 1080p ASUS VG279QM uses an IPS panel and supports 280 Hz. "


Same link.

Interesting panel. And yes it does underline IPS got a LOT faster. But... there is always a catch. 1ms input lag like TN? You don't want that:

The panel does do very well at 280hz though with the right overdrive setting - AND - (very important) if you can maintain that high FPS number. Call me convinced, those RTC overshoot numbers do look fantastic. But again: the catch here is that you need to maintain stable FPS, or you will not enjoy those qualities all the time. It will make frame drops more noticeable.

Personally, I'm much more partial to *balanced* specs. These IPS'es are definitely going the right way though, but I'd much rather see them stick to 120-165hz instead and focus on other qualities.

You can always just guess what's what. Lookey here: the optimal setting for this 280hz panel.
Those are not green overshoot blocks there... and overdrive must be used. So now Acer gets 360hz without ghosting?

 

[Recon-UK]

Interesting panel. And yes it does underline IPS got a LOT faster. But... there is always a catch. 1ms input lag like TN? You don't want that:

View attachment 160009

The panel does do very well at 280hz though with the right overdrive setting - AND - (very important) if you can maintain that high FPS number. Call me convinced, those RTC overshoot numbers do look fantastic.

Personally, I'm much more partial to *balanced* specs. These IPS'es are definitely going the right way though, but I'd much rather see them stick to 120-165hz instead and focus on other qualities.

Yes.. check my 1080P panel...

125% sRGB... for anyone here with anything less, it may look oversaturated to your eyes, the darks may look crushed, but on this screen, there is no crushing of darks and colour is stupidly good, this is in stock setting too (adjusted to sRGB from factory)

 

[Vayra86]

Yes.. check my 1080P panel...

125% sRGB... for anyone here with anything less, it may look oversaturated to your eyes, the darks may look crushed, but on this screen, there is no crushing of darks and colour is stupidly good, this is in stock setting too (adjusted to sRGB from factory)View attachment 160010View attachment 160011View attachment 160012

How is the smearing on that one?

a monitor - that's only your personal preference.

Absolutely true

 

[Recon-UK]

How is the smearing on that one?

Very low.

Same version, my bad.

 

[Berfs1]

Apparently the monitor is set to cost 1100$ USD. Here's the thing: The Asus TUF 280Hz monitor is 400$. This 1100$ 360Hz monitor won't sell to anyone but the people in eSports championships (and of course to the people who want the best of the best when money is no object).

 

[1d10t]

Even 2080TI is struggling to feeding this monitor at lowest details

Actually I'm surprise IPS can actually catching up VA, surpassed it even

Yes.. check my 1080P panel...

125% sRGB... for anyone here with anything less, it may look oversaturated to your eyes, the darks may look crushed, but on this screen, there is no crushing of darks and colour is stupidly good, this is in stock setting too (adjusted to sRGB from factory)

Samsung S-PVA QLED, very hard to tame, doesn't work well with custom ICC Profiles and apparently SpectraCal hated him too

 

[mechtech]

Well you are very limited as to what you can play at 4K with your RX 480 too, you seem to like pixels, others prefer speed, i am on the speed side.


120-144hz is a blur for me, but from 60 to 120hz is night and day.

I have 144hz as it is a 2018 monitor with Quantum Dot technology and a VA panel, 3000:1 contrast ratio, image is insanely good.


Most 4K screens can barely hit 1000:1.

Yes 60 to 80 is noticeable, 60 to 100 noticeable, 60 to anything higher is noticeable. I used to have a 120Hz screen back in the CS:S days. Newest game I play now is BL3, no issues with 60 fps constantly and consistently. I run it at 2560 with 1.5 scaling and it's surprisingly pretty sharp. 2D desktop is 4k, but 150% scaling, very sharp, so happy with it.

Ideally I would like a 24" ish size screen, 4k, true 10-bit color, (no FRC/aFRC), no PWM backlighting, very light AG coating, 120Hz refresh, IPS viewing angles, VA contrast ratios, full DP v2.0 support, perhaps rec.2020 full coverage also.................etc., etc.

Guess I will keep waiting.

 

[efikkan]

Frame rates certainly matter to many, some are more sensitive to lag and stutter than others, but 360 Hz is probably far beyond what anyone could make use of.

But frame rates it's actually more about reducing frame times, which does scale exponentially. Additionally, frame time consistency matters, and pushing frame times low enough will probably increase variance at some point. At 360 Hz (2.8ms per frame), it really takes very little to cause substantial stutter. And human vision is much more sensitive to variance than absolute frame rates.

There is certainly potential to reduce latency from the OS and the game engines, but gains from frame rates are negligible beyond ~200 Hz…

 

[Vayra86]

Frame rates certainly matter to many, some are more sensitive to lag and stutter than others, but 360 Hz is probably far beyond what anyone could make use of.

But frame rates it's actually more about reducing frame times, which does scale exponentially. Additionally, frame time consistency matters, and pushing frame times low enough will probably increase variance at some point. At 360 Hz (2.8ms per frame), it really takes very little to cause substantial stutter. And human vision is much more sensitive to variance than absolute frame rates.

There is certainly potential to reduce latency from the OS and the game engines, but gains from frame rates are negligible beyond ~200 Hz…

Amen. Less is sometimes just more.

 

[Berfs1]

Amen. Less is sometimes just more.

To add to that, there is also gtg response time, cable latency (which may not be a lot but can still help if lowered even a bit), etc.