360Hz Acer Predator X25b miiprzx

[speancer]

It would be nice to have some of these 360Hz monitors in 27".

^Agree I think I would of bought a 27" 360Hz monitor before buying another 24"

I believe many people consider 1080p to be too low ppi already on 27 inch display, myself included, even 1080p on 24.5 inch screen is already a little bit too low ppi if you ask me (I'm used to 1440p/27"), although it doesn't bother me too much. 27" 1440p 360 Hz would cost a little fortune

Also, I believe these 360 Hz monitors are directed mostly to e-sports players, and 24.5" size is the tournament standard and a vastly preferred size among pros.

As always though, it's up to you, some don't care, some can't stand pixel density of 1080p/27".

[Discorz]

I believe many people consider 1080p to be too low ppi already on 27 inch display, myself included, even 1080p on 24.5 inch screen is already a little bit too low ppi if you ask me (I'm used to 1440p/27"), although it doesn't bother me too much. 27" 1440p 360 Hz would cost a little fortune

Also, I believe these 360 Hz monitors are directed mostly to e-sports players, and 24.5" size is the tournament standard and a vastly preferred size among pros.

As always though, it's up to you, some don't care, some can't stand pixel density of 1080p/27".

Ofcourse, I personally don't mind a bigger pixel at all, even 1080p on 32" would be mostly fine for me. Immersiveness compensates the pixel density, draws you in and you forget about it . Most people don't like it so 1080p on 27" will probably extinct very quickly, if it already didn't.

[Chief Blur Buster]

Also, I believe these 360 Hz monitors are directed mostly to e-sports players, and 24.5" size is the tournament standard and a vastly preferred size among pros.

High-Hz is for everyone, not just esports.

360 Hz monitors is the closest thing to CRT-clarity blurless sample-and-hold today, and browser scrolling on a 360 Hz monitor has 1/6th the motion blur. Some of us are using 240 Hz for non-gaming purposes.

[speancer]

Also, I believe these 360 Hz monitors are directed mostly to e-sports players, and 24.5" size is the tournament standard and a vastly preferred size among pros.

High-Hz is for everyone, not just esports.

360 Hz monitors is the closest thing to CRT-clarity blurless sample-and-hold today, and browser scrolling on a 360 Hz monitor has 1/6th the motion blur. Some of us are using 240 Hz for non-gaming purposes.

Never said it's not for everyone, obviously, and I know high Hz is beneficial outside of gaming, obviously again, it's just comfortable for every day desktop use as well (switching back to lower Hz gives me a stroke), but let's be real - how many people will buy 24.5" 1080p $900 monitor to have a better browser scrolling experience? It's quite obviously targeted at e-sports titles players and professionals, since in these e-sports games it's actually possible to maintain 360 fps consistently. I'm also quite confident that vast majority of people choose 27" 1440p 144~ Hz over higher refresh rate these days. Additionally, from what I've heard, for many people the difference between 240 Hz and 360 Hz would probably be too small (or 360 Hz being not good enough, like some people just prefer DyAc over 360 Hz) to justify the high cost as well.

[Chief Blur Buster]

360 Hz is not expensive forever.

This be true they're expensive now. But 120Hz is quickly heading to the same price as 60 Hz already. Eventually that'll happens to 240Hz.

Most new game consoles support 120Hz+, most new 4K HDTVs support 120Hz, many new smartphones (e.g. Samsung Galaxy) includes 120Hz and soon the next iPhone will make it an inclusion. Now, consider when DELL/HP starts to replace 60Hz office monitors with 120Hz for ergonomic reasons (let's say, ETA by end of 2020s decade), we can consider 120Hz effectively "mainstream" like color retina screens and/or high-definition... Then 240 Hz is the next commoditization dominoe to fall. It's a slow refresh rate race -- but when Hz is a freebie feature, it benefits more than just games.

The point being is that like 4K costing $10,000 in mid 2000s, turning into a $299 Walmart special -- high Hz isn't expensive forever.

Some of the mainstream is handwaving-away high Hz as an esports-only benefit... (like people 20 years ago dismissing 4K as an unnecessary fairytale).

I still remember the days when people laughed at an expensive color screen built into a telephone (long before the smartphone and PDA days)

The point being, we have to be careful to nuance the high-Hz education, there's a distinction between "360Hz is only for esports" versus "360 Hz is only for esports simply because it is so expensive".

We don't want people dismissing high-Hz benefits for non-gaming humankind, when educating people about high-Hz.

[speancer]

Of course I agree, I totally did not mean to dismiss high Hz benefits for non-players. I'd recommend high Hz monitor for everyone anytime, no matter what they do, because it's just so much more comfortable and smooth, I was just pointing out that it's not really affordable/beneficial to purchase a 24.5" 1080p 360 Hz display solely for desktop/work usage right now (probably 27" 1440p 144~ is a much better option for most people), as well as the difference between 240 and 360 Hz might be not high enough for many, but as we know, a lot of 144-240 Hz options are now very affordable and I'd say 144 Hz is already a standard (for gaming monitors at least) because of how cheap it has become.

[badsykes]

When i see IPS brightness 400cd and 0.28mm pixel pitch and 1080p it comes in my mind a similarly panel as MSI MAG251rx with AU Optronics.