Acer Announces Three More Predator Monitors; G-Sync, 200 Hz+

[Raevenlord]

At CES 2017, Acer announced three new Predator displays that boast very high refresh rates of 200Hz or higher, while also featuring G-Sync support so as to improve your gaming experience.

The Acer Predator XB252Q and Predator XB272 displays are nearly identical: 1920x1080 resolution with a maximum refresh rate of 240Hz, G-Sync, and a low 1ms response time. As you might have already guessed, in order to achieve refresh rates this high, Acer opted to use TN panel technology, which makes the displays able to represent 100% of the sRGB color spectrum (which only amounts to 72% of the NTSC color gamut, but this is par of the course for TN-based panels). The only difference between both displays is that the Predator 252Q measures 24.5 inches and the Predator XB272 comes in at 27 inches. Acer equipped both displays with two 2W DTS speakers and a 4x USB 3.0 hub, and both the displays feature tilt, swivel, height, and pivot adjustments.





The third new Predator display Acer introduced is the Predator Z301CT, and this is the most interesting one. For the first part, Acer equipped the Z301CT with Tobii eye tracking hardware to allow you to control your system with eye movements. Second, its panel sees an upgrade to a VA -based solution, which should give better image quality alongside the improved 178º viewing angle, though it does carry a slightly lower 200Hz refresh rate and a higher 4 ms response time. It does come in at a larger 30 inches, with a widescreen (21:9) resolution of 2560x1080 (which I personally favor over conventional resolutions, but that's just me). It also has a curvature of 1800R which supposedly gives you an immersed feeling while gaming, though I can't really speak for that. Acer have also upped the speaker output to 3 W. Like the other two displays, the Z301CT supports G-Sync and has a hub with 4x USB 3.0 ports. Unlike the other two displays Acer showed, however, the Predator Z301CT only allows for tilt, swivel and height adjustments. The Predator Z301CT21:9 curved gaming monitor with eye-tracking functionality was selected as "Best of Innovation"

In regards to pricing, the 252Q comes in at $549.99, the XB272 makes do with a $679.99 price-tag, and the Z301CT comes in at $899.99

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[deu]

The rant: Stop making new 1080p 200hz+ screens! Do a 4K with 120hz or get 1440p 144 hz down in price! :0

 

[Ubersonic]

Tobii eye tracking hardware to allow you to control your system with eye movements.

Yes

Second, its panel sees an upgrade to a VA -based solution, which should give better image quality

Yes!

improved 178º viewing angle

YES!

200Hz refresh rate

YES!

30 inches

TAKE MY MONEY!

(21:9) resolution of 2560x1080

MY BODY IS READY!

the Z301CT supports G-Sync

Do you hear, Sorceress? The final moment has come. All the forces of Greyskull, all the powers in the universe will be vested in me! ME!

It also has a curvature-

*clenches fist*
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

[Raevenlord]

Yes


Yes!


YES!


YES!


TAKE MY MONEY!


MY BODY IS READY!


Do you hear, Sorceress? The final moment has come. All the forces of Greyskull, all the powers in the universe will be vested in me! ME!


*clenches fist*
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Man, I laughed really hard at that one.
Does it make that much of a difference? I've honestly never used a curved monitor or TV, so I don't know how it feels. You seem to have an opinion on the matter, though

 

[atomicus]

Yes
*clenches fist*
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

What's wrong with a curve? On 16:9 it's pointless, but on 21:9 it's ideal. A subtle one as seen on the Acer X34/PG34 is actually nice... you don't even notice when sat in front of it. I have one myself and having also sat in front of a flat ultrawide, it definitely was worse... almost feels like the screen is going away from you, but that subtle curve really helps. I have seen some ultrawides going for a more extreme curve though, which I actually don't think works. And as I say, if you're referring to 16:9 only, then I agree, it's stupid.

 

[RejZoR]

It's not enough that you get a massive FOV distortion as it is, now you also have it messed up physically. Yay. I'm joining the guy who screams NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Also, super high refresh 1080p is nice for gamers who want to spend some more money on high end monitor, but don't want to break the bank for absolutely necessary pair of GTX 1080 to comfortably play games. Besides, to really enjoy 240Hz, you kinda need 1080p to even reach those framerates...

 

[Ubersonic]

Man, I laughed really hard at that one.
Does it make that much of a difference? I've honestly never used a curved monitor or TV, so I don't know how it feels. You seem to have an opinion on the matter, though

Basically curved screens are a lot like the wavy S shaped typing Keyboards Microsoft were pushing in the 90's, either you love them and think they are the future of mankind or you cannot stand them, I think you can guess which camp I am in.

The issue I have with it is, I have used 29:1 screens since their inception and always place the monitor on the desk so it fills my vision horizontally, it doesn't matter if it's 29" or 34" it will be placed at a distance to occupy the same visual space. Having a curved screen just messes with this and adds nothing, I had a 34" curved screen and couldn't stand it, it just looked wrong. Maybe if you sit so close it sticks out of your peripheral and you need to turn your head it's useful, but I don't like doing that.

 

[bogami]

They look good! But as long as the this monitor I have not before my eyes I can not assess what can deliver in the picture quality . From personal experience I can say that it is better to invest in SLI or CF, which we will provide a stable high frame rate . the picture with higher resolution, there is a more desirable and this here. The higher resolution allows the extended view as it displays much larger space. So I have the 3440x1440 resolution and 2x 1080 GTX stable frame rate around 140Fr to 200Fr at the highest settings. 200 frame rate is the top level for all SLI HB supported new games . 240 Hz in this case is unnecessary .

 

[Prima.Vera]

What's wrong with a curve? On 16:9 it's pointless, but on 21:9 it's ideal. A subtle one as seen on the Acer X34/PG34 is actually nice... you don't even notice when sat in front of it. I have one myself and having also sat in front of a flat ultrawide, it definitely was worse... almost feels like the screen is going away from you, but that subtle curve really helps. I have seen some ultrawides going for a more extreme curve though, which I actually don't think works. And as I say, if you're referring to 16:9 only, then I agree, it's stupid.

Yes, I'm also using a 21:9 curved one, and curvature is perfect. Seems like nowadays people love to speak without actually knowing the facts, or at least try them first.

 

[efikkan]

Acer opted to use TN panel technology, which makes the displays able to represent 100% of the sRGB color spectrum (which only amounts to 72% of the NTSC color gamut, but this is par of the course for TN-based panels).

As a note, these specs are on par with most "good" consumer IPS panels as well.
If you e.g. compare two popular gaming monitors Asus PG278Q(TN) vs. Asus PG279Q(IPS), you'll see both have the same color space ("standard gamut"), the same gradation (8-bit native), and the same color fidelity. This is because PG278Q and similar models uses a premium quality TN panel which have color quality on par with other normal good IPS panels. Anyone wanting better colors would have to go for the premium IPS panels for graphical artists with wide gamut, 10-bit gradation, and hardware LUT calibration.

TN remains the best choice for gaming, not only because of response time, but also because of IPS' inability to display details in dark regions, and the dark bluish "cloudy" effect.

 

[TheGuruStud]

The rant: Stop making new 1080p 200hz+ screens! Do a 4K with 120hz or get 1440p 144 hz down in price! :0

Yep, 1080 needs to go away. It's such a night and day difference just going to 1440.

 

[nickbaldwin86]

I was so excited and then I read 1080p and I just scanned for high res... *sad face... moving on

 

[Slizzo]

Yeah, we need more 1440p panels at higher than 144Hz or 165Hz refresh rate.

 

[Camm]

Replace the Tobii with a Intel Realsense and this might have been interesting.

 

[Dethroy]

Yes, I'm also using a 21:9 curved one, and curvature is perfect. Seems like nowadays people love to speak without actually knowing the facts, or at least try them first.

I've been using 21:9 panels for years now. In all sorts of sizes and resolutions. And I've been using three curved ones as well (Dell U3415W, LG 34UC97-S and LG 34UC88-B). While the curved screens may look nice at first, actual real world usage leaves much to be desired. It's nothing but marketing bogus.

 

[medi01]

Yeah. Just when Adaptive Sync (you bet that it is FreeSync based as in displayport standard) has become part of HDMI 2.1.

Timing for overpriced "chip that nobody needs that adds lag" could not have been better.

 

[Prima.Vera]

... actual real world usage leaves much to be desired. It's nothing but marketing bogus.

Please explain. Also for what purpose are you using the monitor?

 

[Firedrops]

1080p 30" should not be included in their flagship line-up. That dpi is cancer-inducing.

 

[Ubersonic]

1080p 30" should not be included in their flagship line-up. That dpi is cancer-inducing.

You have to account for the 21:9 factor too, 1080/30" sounds vomit inducing but due to the aspect it's actually better DPI than a 1080p 24" or 1440p 32" screen with 16:9 aspect.

 

[Dethroy]

You have to account for the 21:9 factor too, 1080/30" sounds vomit inducing but due to the aspect it's actually better DPI than a 1080p 24" or 1440p 32" screen with 16:9 aspect.

That's correct. In both cases, the 21:9 screen would have a 0.71% higher dpi.

Please explain. Also for what purpose are you using the monitor?

Have been using these screens mostly for administrative tasks, office work, media consumption and a bit of photo editing. Working with spreadsheets and editing photos was an unpleasant experience I have to say. I'd imagine using a curved monitor for nothing else but gaming would work, but I have a hard time believing people will utilize their PCs for nothing else but gaming.

 

[z1tu]

That's correct. In both cases, the 21:9 screen would have a 0.71% higher dpi.

Have been using these screens mostly for administrative tasks, office work, media consumption and a bit of photo editing. Working with spreadsheets and editing photos was an unpleasant experience I have to say. I'd imagine using a curved monitor for nothing else but gaming would work, but I have a hard time believing people will utilize their PCs for nothing else but gaming.

Why would you have a hard time believing that? Besides internet and watching movies/tv shows, gaming is the most part I use my pc.

 

[Chaitanya]

Yep, 1080 needs to go away. It's such a night and day difference just going to 1440.

1080p monitors will die the day graphics cards costing less than 250$ will be comfortable at pushing 1440p @60fps or higher. Until that day 1080p sadly is here to stay.