Tuesday, June 23rd 2020

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

Acer today announced one of the world's highest refresh-rate monitors in the form of the Predator X25. joining in the likes of Alienware and ASUS, who have already announced their own 360 Hz in the form of the AW2521H and ROG Swift 360, respectively. The Predator X25's über-high refresh rate will leave players out of any excuses so as to why they weren't able to react in time to a threat.

The 360 Hz refresh rates comes with compromises (resolution is only 1080p), and there will be NVIDIA's G-Sync on-board (but a graphics card and CPU combo that can push those 360 FPS to really make use of this refresh rate... Hmm. That's a tougher deal). Alienware has confirmed their AW2521H[ monitor uses IPS panel technology, and it would thus seem likely that Acer also makes use of that particular panel technology on the Predator X25. However, we'll have to wait and see. The monitor brings some quality of life technologies, such as ergonomics tilting (25 degrees backward, 5 degrees forward), swivel (30 degrees) and height adjustment (4.7 inches). The monitor also features an RGB lighting on the back of the monitor that can light up according to scenes being rendered or according to music you're playing, there's automatic brightness exposure, and a friendly reminder schedule that pops up a warning for users who have been using the monitor for too long, reminding them to take a little walk. No pricing or release date were available at time of writing.
Add your own comment

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

#26
lexluthermiester
CrAsHnBuRnXp
Also your opinion
Supported by statistics. See Steam hardware stats..
Posted on Reply
#27
InVasMani
Since the people that are going to obsess over this display don't care about graphics fideltiy in the first place this will pair well with DLSS just corrode the image quality for the sake of FPS.
Posted on Reply
#28
TheLostSwede
lexluthermiester
Supported by statistics. See Steam hardware stats..
You mean the stats that show that most people have a GTX 1060 and 1050 Ti graphics cards?
Of course those people would use a 1080p screen, but NONE, ZERO, NADA of them would get 360fps on this screen with those cards.
Posted on Reply
#29
lexluthermiester
TheLostSwede
You mean the stats that show that most people have a GTX 1060 and 1050 Ti graphics cards?
Of course those people would use a 1080p screen, but NONE, ZERO, NADA of them would get 360fps on this screen with those cards.
You missed the point...
Posted on Reply
#30
TheLostSwede
lexluthermiester
You missed the point...
No, not at all.
You made a claim that 1080p was the most common resolution. Point taken.
This is a 1080p screen, right?
It can do 360Hz, or so it's claimed, right?
But none of the same people you point out on the Steam survey are going to buy this, as their graphics cards, as I pointed out, are GeForce GTX 1060 or 1050 Ti cards...
In other words, your point has really very little to do with this product, as it's clearly not aimed at 99.9% of those on the Steam survey that owns a 1080p screen.
Posted on Reply
#31
natr0n
The Hz game has come full circle.
Posted on Reply
#32
Xex360
cucker tarlson
1080p is absolutely fine for gaming and I would mind owning one of those 1080p 240/360.not on my priority list but man,1080p 240/360 is a million miles better than owning a 60hz 4K.
this must be fun for shooters and parkour games,I bet dying light be the zombie mode plays ridiculous on this.

I honestly don't understand people who see this and curse ppl who are interested.why ? not interested then get out.there'll be people who are cause they understand that pushing pc gaming experience is not just about more pixels.

but I guess that's the type,they think 1080p is stupid and then see this and say "I would like to pay a grand for that"


Can't agree more, gaming monitors are pathetic, they still use LCD technologies which even after decades can't even get close to CRT. The worst part as you mentioned the price, if they cost say 500/600€ max it'd be reasonable, but they cost more than an OLED TV with better technologies across the board.
Posted on Reply
#34
SamuelL
cucker tarlson
1080p is absolutely fine for gaming and I would mind owning one of those 1080p 240/360.not on my priority list but man,1080p 240/360 is a million miles better than owning a 60hz 4K.
this must be fun for shooters and parkour games,I bet dying light be the zombie mode plays ridiculous on this.

I honestly don't understand people who see this and curse ppl who are interested.why ? not interested then get out.there'll be people who are cause they understand that pushing pc gaming experience is not just about more pixels.

but I guess that's the type,they think 1080p is stupid and then see this and say "I would like to pay a grand for that"


I agree with most of this except the "240/360 is a million miles better than owning a 60hz 4K" part. I went back to my 4k 60hz IPS after trying a much faster 1440p LG for a month. My 4k 60hz panel just looked a lot better for the strategy / RTS stuff that I play most often. I guess I'm saying it all depends on what you're playing.
Posted on Reply
#35
lexluthermiester
TheLostSwede
No, not at all.
You made a claim that 1080p was the most common resolution. Point taken.
This is a 1080p screen, right?
It can do 360Hz, or so it's claimed, right?
But none of the same people you point out on the Steam survey are going to buy this, as their graphics cards, as I pointed out, are GeForce GTX 1060 or 1050 Ti cards...
In other words, your point has really very little to do with this product, as it's clearly not aimed at 99.9% of those on the Steam survey that owns a 1080p screen.
You're assuming that those that have better cards also do not game on 1080p displays and that is a VERY poor assumption. So yes, you missed the point.
SamuelL
My 4k 60hz panel just looked a lot better for the strategy / RTS stuff that I play most often. I guess I'm saying it all depends on what you're playing.
This.
Posted on Reply
#36
Dave65
My eyes tell me to go back to 1080p but I just won't do it.
Posted on Reply
#37
mechtech
Interesting, I could not tell the difference between 120 and 144 hz settings on a 144Hz screen. I thought diminishing returns started taking effect after 100Hz. So is this just for bragging rights/e-peen??
Posted on Reply
#38
Recon-UK
1080P 144hz is beautiful.

I have seen the 4K TV's... i am not missing anything, my 24" monitor basically looks slightly better than a 4K set at 50". 91 PPI on 1080P vs 88 on 4K.


If i need more details i can just downsample, i am not losing anything doing so.
Posted on Reply
#39
mechtech
Dave65
My eyes tell me to go back to 1080p but I just won't do it.
Your eyes or your brain? My eyes say never go back to 1080p, unless its a screen 15" or smaller. I have a 27" 4k. I used a 24" 1080p the other day and it was like looking at an 8-bit video game. :)
Posted on Reply
#40
Recon-UK
mechtech
Your eyes or your brain? My eyes say never go back to 1080p, unless its a screen 15" or smaller. I have a 27" 4k. I used a 24" 1080p the other day and it was like looking at an 8-bit video game. :)
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.
AnarchoPrimitiv
No, I agree with him, before I consider 300fps to be of any benefit, I want to see scientifically controlled tests that prove an AVERAGE human can even distinguish the difference between 240hz and 360hz
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.
Posted on Reply
#41
ratirt
Recon-UK
1080P 144hz is beautiful.

I have seen the 4K TV's... i am not missing anything, my 24" monitor basically looks slightly better than a 4K set at 50". 91 PPI on 1080P vs 88 on 4K.


If i need more details i can just downsample, i am not losing anything doing so.
Are you saying that games look better when you have a higher FPS and high refresh rate monitor or did I miss something?
Posted on Reply
#42
cucker tarlson
SamuelL
I agree with most of this except the "240/360 is a million miles better than owning a 60hz 4K" part.
I wholehearteadly don't.
there are some games you can plaay at 60,but there aren't many of them.

yeah,for rts.
Posted on Reply
#43
Recon-UK
ratirt
Are you saying that games looks better when you have a higher FPS and high refresh rate monitor or did I miss something?
Yes they look silky smooth.

"Compared to TNs, VA panels do offer much better color reproduction and typically hit the full sRGB spectrum, even on lower-end models. If you’re willing to spend a bit more, Samsung’s Quantum Dot SVA panels can hit 125 percent sRGB coverage. "

www.howtogeek.com/658701/tn-vs.-ips-vs.-va-whats-the-best-display-panel-technology/

144hz, impeccable image quality, 2 HDMI & DP, pixels only go so far, they can't fix bad image quality.

The price jump to 4K for a comparable screen would be ridiculous.
Posted on Reply
#44
cucker tarlson
ratirt
Are you saying that games look better when you have a higher FPS and high refresh rate monitor or did I miss something?
yes.visual experience in games is 99% image in motion.

even for tpp rpgs I prefer my avg. fps to stay above 75 and 1% over 65.and that's the lowest I'd expect from the genre where I'm most comforatble playing at lower framerate.an it's still a broad statement tho
for example for a batman game I really wanna stay above 100 fps as often as I can.it looks better and plays better.movement,flying,fighting and even the damn cape looks more natural.
Posted on Reply
#45
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
CrAsHnBuRnXp
If youre still making 1080p, youre doing it wrong.
Anymal
Even 1080p 24" at 92 ppi is eye soaring.
Naah.
mechtech
Your eyes or your brain? My eyes say never go back to 1080p, unless its a screen 15" or smaller. I have a 27" 4k. I used a 24" 1080p the other day and it was like looking at an 8-bit video game. :)
I honestly don't know how people can deal with so small things, considering scaling is still not perfect.
CrAsHnBuRnXp
1080p is stupid when you have a 2080Ti for example attached to it.
Most people don't.
Posted on Reply
#46
cucker tarlson
crashandburn has lost the plot in the first place.

this is a luxury e-sports monitor.

it's not a fail.it's the best one around.
Posted on Reply
#47
ratirt
Recon-UK
Yes they look silky smooth.

"Compared to TNs, VA panels do offer much better color reproduction and typically hit the full sRGB spectrum, even on lower-end models. If you’re willing to spend a bit more, Samsung’s Quantum Dot SVA panels can hit 125 percent sRGB coverage. "

www.howtogeek.com/658701/tn-vs.-ips-vs.-va-whats-the-best-display-panel-technology/
144hz, impeccable image quality, 2 HDMI & DP, pixels only go so far, they can't fix bad image quality.

The price jump to 4K for a comparable screen would be ridiculous.
Hold on there pal. Silky smooth that's game experience but not that it looks better when you compare visuals to games set at 4k. That's a different thing.
I'm not comparing panels only 1080p high refresh rate vs 4k resolution.
Posted on Reply
#48
Recon-UK
ratirt
Hold on there pal. Silky smooth that's game experience but not that it looks better when you compare visuals to games set at 4k. That's a different thing.
I'm not comparing panels only 1080p high refresh rate vs 4k resolution.
No contest, 4K looks like shit without good panel tech same as 1080P.

It all adds up, my panel will look superior vs a basic 4K monitor, it does... it does to my eyes.
Posted on Reply
#49
ratirt
Recon-UK
No contest, 4K looks like shit without good panel tech same as 1080P.

It all adds up, my panel will look superior vs a basic 4K monitor, it does... it does to my eyes.
huh. I understand that the quality of the panel may not be the best but you can't say, being a sane person, that games at 1080p high refresh rate monitor looks better than games at 4k in general.
Maybe your eyes are fixed on the high refresh rate too much but the visuals at 4k are extraordinary in comparison to what you get at 1080p despite high refresh rate cause the last one gives you smooth experience not better visuals.
Posted on Reply
#50
Recon-UK
ratirt
huh. I understand that the quality of the panel may not be the best but you can't say, being a sane person, that games at 1080p high refresh rate monitor looks better than games at 4k in general.
Maybe your eyes are fixed on the high refresh rate too much but the visuals at 4k are extraordinary in comparison to what you get at 1080p despite high refresh rate cause the last one gives you smooth experience not better visuals.
Movement is visual...

You can get most of the benefits of higher resolution by down sampling but at this point that depends how much GPU horsepower is left over from filling the 144hz refresh rate.

When in game and playing, the smoothness is very compelling, 60 hz looks a stuttery mess, it is instantly noticeable if a game is not running at a minimum of 120hz from the get go.

Things do improve greatly on a higher refresh panel, target acquisition, target leading, improvement to input delay, far easier on your eyes.

You can also make use of safety features if your panel has them (eye care).

Resolution means nothing when your image looks washed out, ghosting, dull input latency and generally frustrating for any modern online shooter regardless of being competitive or not.

Even a casual player with a 120hz screen will have quite the advantage over others using a 60hz panel, it is the truth.

CSGO rank improved from DMG straight to SMFC with just a screen upgrade, i could have sworn everyone was cheating at 60hz.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment