Acer Predator XB271HU bmiprz 144-165 Hz

[arbiter]

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.

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]

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]

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

 

[Liam_francois]

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

 

[Inle]

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]

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

 

[Fx]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Consistent FPS make games smooth.

I agree with both your points.

We need to define smooth with respect to fps!

 

[deu]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 .

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..