Leap to UHD

Yaayuh!

Yaayuh!

Yaayuh!

Soldato
Joined
5 Nov 2010
Posts
24,618
Location
Hertfordshire
Hi all.

I'm looking to spend around the £500 mark on a UHD monitor, preferably G-Sync because i'm moving from 120hz and i although i'm okay with losing some FPS/HZ (lets face it, i'm not going to get anywhere near 120fps @ 3840x2160!) i would like to make sure i have a smooth experience.

This has brought me to the Acer Predator XB281HK, seems to tick all boxes. Reviews (or lack of them) seem good but some user experiences have not.

Is it worth the gamble? I assume OCUK will handle RMA if there's any serious issues? Are there any dead-pixel issues on these panels?

Any advice appreciated.
 
Last edited:
as above, I would go with 1440/144hz
I had a UHD 60hz screen and comparing side by side with a 1440/60hz I struggled to really see that much of an improvement IQ wise, but then going to 1440/144hz gsync was a massive improvement over both... UHD at 28" is wasted because you basically need to press your face against the glass to be able to go "wow the pixels are so tiny"
 
Cheers for the feedback guys.

It's annoying. Just a bad time to buy anything at the moment:

Broadwell-E releasing soon
Pascal releasing 2nd half of the year with what looks to be a game-changer
Still bugger all monitor options and inflated prices
 
If you play anything recent (AAA titles with leading edge graphics) or fast paced, you'd be best off with 1440p. I'm on 4K and though it looks lovely, there are definite sacrifices.

If you play older games, or slower paced stuff where the fps don't matter so much e.g. Civilisation, then 4K might work for you. Don't go for it just because it's 4K.
 
mulpsmebeauty said:
If you play anything recent (AAA titles with leading edge graphics) or fast paced, you'd be best off with 1440p. I'm on 4K and though it looks lovely, there are definite sacrifices.

If you play older games, or slower paced stuff where the fps don't matter so much e.g. Civilisation, then 4K might work for you. Don't go for it just because it's 4K.
Click to expand...

Depends on GPU. A 980ti can handle almost anything thrown at it, and you don't need all the bells and whistles when you start playing at that res.
 
BluesFanUK said:
Depends on GPU. A 980ti can handle almost anything thrown at it, and you don't need all the bells and whistles when you start playing at that res.
Click to expand...

I certainly wouldn't have any AA on at that res. But wouldn't want to sacrifice on other settings really, unless it's just a couple of nVidia bolt-ons. Otherwise it'd be like polishing a **** (hi-res but rubbish effects).
 
I would wait a bit and see what 2016 brings. I now its hard when you want to splash the cash but investing in Acer is likely to have you tearing your hair out.
 
BluesFanUK said:
Depends on GPU. A 980ti can handle almost anything thrown at it, and you don't need all the bells and whistles when you start playing at that res.
Click to expand...

Not a chance. I have a TX and even at 3440x1440 you have to knock down settings on some of the newer games. They are only going to get more demanding as well. Turning up the res isnt a substitution for turning down effects
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom