Acer 390Hz monitor - XV252QF

[Notty_PT]

You tried this monitor at 390hz with BFI and you still think 240hz is better…? Seems like a stretch. Some actual evidence would be great

Pixel response time wise, yes! No doubts of it. I shown images some pages ago. On the left Acer Nitro 390hz, on the right ozone dsp24, both at 1080pps



If we talk about Strobing, to me it is even worse and no way I would play like this (I personally HATE trails and refuse to play with that). Acer Nitro 390hz max strobing:

[mxblue]

You tried this monitor at 390hz with BFI and you still think 240hz is better…? Seems like a stretch. Some actual evidence would be great

Pixel response time wise, yes! No doubts of it. I shown images some pages ago. On the left Acer Nitro 390hz, on the right ozone dsp24, both at 1080pps



If we talk about Strobing, to me it is even worse and no way I would play like this (I personally HATE trails and refuse to play with that). Acer Nitro 390hz max strobing:

something seems wrong with the image you posted of BFI. I'm watching the UFO on my monitor right now and it looks way better than the one shown... similar to DYAC+.

[Notty_PT]

something seems wrong with the image you posted of BFI. I'm watching the UFO on my monitor right now and it looks way better than the one shown... similar to DYAC+.

You can watch the comparasion on pretty much any review. No comparasion really imo

[mxblue]

something seems wrong with the image you posted of BFI. I'm watching the UFO on my monitor right now and it looks way better than the one shown... similar to DYAC+.

You can watch the comparasion on pretty much any review. No comparasion really imo

Honest question - why clip the 1080p/s ... it's clearly worst of the three. Both 960 and 1920 seem good.

IMG_0919.JPG (228 KiB) Viewed 5631 times

[Discorz]

These pursuits are taken by Optimum Tech. He is capturing only top row ufo with darker cyan shade where ips always looks a bit worse. His camera could use better setting adjustment with less exposure, details are lost in yellow ufo area. Ends up looking worse than it really is. The one with dark gray background is from Bijan Jamshidi, so its a different camera setup.

Here are some other examples:
viewtopic.php?p=68707#p68707
https://i.ibb.co/3kcJMLC/Acer-XV252-QF- ... 960psp.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/irnIPT2.jpeg

Beware that selecting speed presets on test ufo doesn't result to panning exactly at 960, 1080, 1920 pps. This can be tricky for direct comparison because slower speeds result is sharper image and faster in blurrier.

390Hz at 960pps actually moves at 780pps
360Hz at 960pps actually moves at 1080pps
240Hz at 960pps moves at 960pps

390Hz at 1080pps actually moves at 1170pps
360Hz at 1080pps moves at 1080pps
240Hz at 1080pps moves at 1200pps

All combinations here - Actual UFO Panning Speeds.

[Notty_PT]

Honest question - why clip the 1080p/s ... it's clearly worst of the three. Both 960 and 1920 seem good.

IMG_0919.JPG

The thing is that.. it doesn´t matter. Because all of them seem rubbish to me and I refuse to play with that trail.. why would I if there are models without it? That´s my point

I could also argue that I personally don´t like strobing at all. Not only the input lag increases so you immediatly get rid of one of the biggest 360hz/390hz advantages, wich is the input lag. But I also get bad headache after pronlongued usage (due to the flickering). However that´s not even a question here, the trail is simply atrocious to me.

[michaelcycle00]

Honest question - why clip the 1080p/s ... it's clearly worst of the three. Both 960 and 1920 seem good.

IMG_0919.JPG

The thing is that.. it doesn´t matter. Because all of them seem rubbish to me and I refuse to play with that trail.. why would I if there are models without it? That´s my point

I could also argue that I personally don´t like strobing at all. Not only the input lag increases so you immediatly get rid of one of the biggest 360hz/390hz advantages, wich is the input lag. But I also get bad headache after pronlongued usage (due to the flickering). However that´s not even a question here, the trail is simply atrocious to me.

Well, the input lag penalty you get with strobing ON, on the 390hz, is about 0.8ms which is what Optimum Tech got in his tests. Not sure most could perceive that. I agree with the flickering part though, but with strobing off you may lose track of your opponents while firing due to recoil. I tried a 23.8 inch, 1080p, 60hz monitor yesterday and I honestly think it's a bit too small. Also found the PPI a bit discouraging. It's making me lean towards a 27 inch 1440p 270hz like the Asus XG27AQM just because of that but it also seems a bit too large lol. God damn, decisions... decisions. A 25-inch 1440p monitor would be perfect. Anyway, here's a video of the XG2431 UFO TESTS in order from non-strobed all the way over to the 4 different strobing modes from the brightest to the dimmest. Honestly, the top row UFO seems a bit ghost-ey but it might just be the camera. What do you think?

[lyrill]

you know what would be nice? a monitor that shrinks progressively as it can be thrown closer to you, to maintain the same comfortable viewing angle habit. and expands to tv sizes when you want to kick back and relax, or whatever it is that makes people buy big tv

surely there are studies about optimal max viewing angles? the popular prescription glass frame sizes and % lens distortion on the edges of the commonly sold lens tiers also need factoring in.

[Notty_PT]

Honest question - why clip the 1080p/s ... it's clearly worst of the three. Both 960 and 1920 seem good.

IMG_0919.JPG

The thing is that.. it doesn´t matter. Because all of them seem rubbish to me and I refuse to play with that trail.. why would I if there are models without it? That´s my point

I could also argue that I personally don´t like strobing at all. Not only the input lag increases so you immediatly get rid of one of the biggest 360hz/390hz advantages, wich is the input lag. But I also get bad headache after pronlongued usage (due to the flickering). However that´s not even a question here, the trail is simply atrocious to me.

Well, the input lag penalty you get with strobing ON, on the 390hz, is about 0.8ms which is what Optimum Tech got in his tests. Not sure most could perceive that. I agree with the flickering part though, but with strobing off you may lose track of your opponents while firing due to recoil. I tried a 23.8 inch, 1080p, 60hz monitor yesterday and I honestly think it's a bit too small. Also found the PPI a bit discouraging. It's making me lean towards a 27 inch 1440p 270hz like the Asus XG27AQM just because of that but it also seems a bit too large lol. God damn, decisions... decisions. A 25-inch 1440p monitor would be perfect. Anyway, here's a video of the XG2431 UFO TESTS in order from non-strobed all the way over to the 4 different strobing modes from the brightest to the dimmest. Honestly, the top row UFO seems a bit ghost-ey but it might just be the camera. What do you think?

As I´ve said several times, I don´t trust LDAT input lag measures. Why? There is a good example. Compare Rtings with OptimumTech´s LDAT...

I had the Nitro with BFI and the input lag increase is immediatly noticeable when using it. I don´t trust that 0,8ms data at all.



So, what supposely is only a 0,8ms increase with Zowie model, when using BFI, for Rtings you have DOUBLE the lag, wich ofc would be immediatly noticeable (and it is btw). Makes no sense and makes me completly ignore LDAT input lag methodology.

As for your indecisions, I mean, 1440p is awesome but 27 inches is too big for me. That Asus model is one of the best monitors money can buy tho.. it depends on what you prefer. Nitro 390hz would give you more synched and displayed frames if you play games that have really high framerates. PPI sucks tho. If you found 1080p 23.8 PPI to be bad.. you will think Nitro image is blurry everywhere. So it really depends on your use case and games you play.

I would say someone playing AAA games like Warzone, Battlefield, Vanguard, Apex legends, etc 1440p 270hz might be better option than 390hz

If you play a lot of counter strike, valorant, overwatch, then 390hz is better option

You need to see on wich games you spend more time. But keep in mind both monitors are great for any type of game I mentioned, is not like you can´t do well on other games.

[IIISLIDEIII]

Honest question - why clip the 1080p/s ... it's clearly worst of the three. Both 960 and 1920 seem good.

IMG_0919.JPG

The thing is that.. it doesn´t matter. Because all of them seem rubbish to me and I refuse to play with that trail.. why would I if there are models without it? That´s my point

I could also argue that I personally don´t like strobing at all. Not only the input lag increases so you immediatly get rid of one of the biggest 360hz/390hz advantages, wich is the input lag. But I also get bad headache after pronlongued usage (due to the flickering). However that´s not even a question here, the trail is simply atrocious to me.

Well, the input lag penalty you get with strobing ON, on the 390hz, is about 0.8ms which is what Optimum Tech got in his tests. Not sure most could perceive that. I agree with the flickering part though, but with strobing off you may lose track of your opponents while firing due to recoil. I tried a 23.8 inch, 1080p, 60hz monitor yesterday and I honestly think it's a bit too small. Also found the PPI a bit discouraging. It's making me lean towards a 27 inch 1440p 270hz like the Asus XG27AQM just because of that but it also seems a bit too large lol. God damn, decisions... decisions. A 25-inch 1440p monitor would be perfect. Anyway, here's a video of the XG2431 UFO TESTS in order from non-strobed all the way over to the 4 different strobing modes from the brightest to the dimmest. Honestly, the top row UFO seems a bit ghost-ey but it might just be the camera. What do you think?

As I´ve said several times, I don´t trust LDAT input lag measures. Why? There is a good example. Compare Rtings with OptimumTech´s LDAT...

I had the Nitro with BFI and the input lag increase is immediatly noticeable when using it. I don´t trust that 0,8ms data at all.



So, what supposely is only a 0,8ms increase with Zowie model, when using BFI, for Rtings you have DOUBLE the lag, wich ofc would be immediatly noticeable (and it is btw). Makes no sense and makes me completly ignore LDAT input lag methodology.

As for your indecisions, I mean, 1440p is awesome but 27 inches is too big for me. That Asus model is one of the best monitors money can buy tho.. it depends on what you prefer. Nitro 390hz would give you more synched and displayed frames if you play games that have really high framerates. PPI sucks tho. If you found 1080p 23.8 PPI to be bad.. you will think Nitro image is blurry everywhere. So it really depends on your use case and games you play.

I would say someone playing AAA games like Warzone, Battlefield, Vanguard, Apex legends, etc 1440p 270hz might be better option than 390hz

If you play a lot of counter strike, valorant, overwatch, then 390hz is better option

You need to see on wich games you spend more time. But keep in mind both monitors are great for any type of game I mentioned, is not like you can´t do well on other games.

warzone, apex and battlefield are pretty heavy games to handle, on a 1440p with 3090 and 10900k
in oc you can't even keep 200fps stable whit this resolution,270hz on 1440p they are just an exercise in style imho, they are useless, if you play cs and valorant you use 360hz or 240hz on 1080p, if you play single players you need fluidity and visual beauty so 1440p is fine but 270hz on that game is useless, if you play apex and warzone 270fps you never do, you don't even do 240 at 1440p, i feel much more competitive in these games with 1080p monitors, besides that the other even bigger problem is that the 1440p always comes with 27 inches and seriously I don't understand how can people think to compete on a 27, in the frantic action and shoot in groups at close range the eyes have screen angles too wide to be able to think they are fast and accurate, 24 inches is the ideal size, the "alternative" solution to use the 27 inches keeping it very far away from us does not work well because you lose the connection with the game, it seems to watch a movie, to compete the screen must be small and must be kept close and not 1 meter away, 27 inches 2k is a great screen when used for pastime and single player games, not to compete.
Nobody forbids trying to use it to compete but it certainly is a disadvantage.