Acer Predator XB321HK 32-inch Ultra HD G-Sync Monitor Review
Conclusion
There are some who will quickly dismiss the Predator XB321HK because of its high price. But just how much more does it cost than any other 32-inch Ultra HD monitor? And we have to remember the G-Sync premium, regardless of the screen it’s installed in, is around $200 of that cost.
But sometimes there are expensive things in this world that are actually worth the asking price. It is true that the number of buyers willing to spend $1200 or more on a monitor is relatively small. And not every premium product can be called a good value. But in this case, we think it’s worth every penny.
Our test results play only a small part in this opinion. Out-of-box accuracy is good and many gamers will enjoy the XB321HK’s picture quality without ever opening the OSD. However we strongly recommend setting Contrast on 40 and Gamma on 1.8 to unlock the monitor’s full potential. Those two changes will take quality from good to great and put the Predator within striking distance of many professional displays we’ve tested.
The thing that impressed us most, however, was the sense of depth and immersion we experienced when using it. Games take on a completely different feel thanks to this jumbo screen. And even though the framerate maxes at 60fps, we never felt cheated when it came to smoothness and clarity. G-Sync is certainly a big factor in that equation and the XB complemented our GTX Titan X gaming system perfectly. As with any Ultra HD monitor, you’ll need to tailor your particular games’ detail levels to achieve playable framerates. Even with lots of graphics horsepower on hand, Far Cry 4 on Ultra probably won’t be that much fun to play.
So now the decision becomes this: Do you go for the flagship 32-inch Ultra HD monitor with G-Sync? Or would it be better to stick with QHD and a higher refresh rate? It seems likely that interface speeds will increase soon since DisplayPort 1.3 (approved in 2014) supports 3840x2160 signals up to 120Hz. Why we have yet to see monitors and video cards with this spec is anyone’s guess. So one could say that Ultra HD monitors available now may soon be obsolete. But even when graphics cards add DP 1.3, they’ll still need more processing power to enable those higher speeds.
Given these facts, we think a premium display like the Predator XB321HK makes a great choice for a high-end gaming rig or even a nice desktop productivity system. Gamers will appreciate its low latency, G-Sync adaptive refresh and stunning clarity. Business and graphics users will no doubt find many uses for its vivid and accurate color-rendering.
It’s not always easy to reward expensive displays no matter how good they are, but the XB321HK represents a good value in our eyes. For that reason, we’re giving it the Tom’s Hardware Editor Recommended Award.
The Acer Predator XB321HK isn’t cheap but we think it’s worth every penny. It’s a flagship display that earns every bit of its title. Ultra HD gaming is still a challenge just because of the massive number of pixels that have to be moved. You’ll need an equally expensive system to realize its full potential, but if you have the means you won’t find better image quality anywhere.
Acer Predator XB321HK
MORE: Best Computer Monitors
MORE: How To Choose A Monitor
MORE: Display Calibration 101
MORE: The Science Behind Tuning Your Monitor
MORE: All Monitor Content
Subscribe to us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter & YouTube.
I'd argue that my 1440p@144hz is a more future-proof investment.
Second, 2160 is the least common multiple of both 720 and 1080, meaning it's the lowest resolution that's a perfect integer scalar of both. So with proper upscaling, a 720 or 1080 source picture can be displayed reasonably well on a 4K display. These panels are made for TVs as well as computer monitors, and the majority of TV signal ( at least in the US ) is still in either 720p or 1080p. Upscaling 1080 to 1620 is the same as upscaling 720 to 1080 ( they're both a factor of 150% ). Upscaling by non-integer factors means you need a lot of pixel interpolation and anti-aliasing. To me, this looks very fuzzy ( I bought a 720p TV over a 1080 TV years ago because playing 720p PS3 games and 720p cable TV on a 1080p display looked horrible to me ). So it may be the powers that be decided on the 4K resolution so that people could adopt the new panels and still get decent picture quality with the older video sources ( at least until, or if, they get upgraded ). If so, I can agree with that.
A 1440p 120Hz/144Hz gaming monitor of your particular flavor (IPS, TN, AMVA/Flat, Curved/Single, Multiple, etc; You get the idear folks) is of a more logical and performance oriented enterprise for the foreseeable future for gaming and has been since the first 4K display that debuted as a "gaming" monitor.
1440p gaming monitors come in under less than 4K "gaming" monitors, traditionally. BETTER performance, no questions asked and are less taxing on your GPU(s). For those with higher-end GPUs, crank up those settings to Ultra and Max, ESPECIALLY with the GTX 1080 now in action and the soon to debut MONSTER, Pascal Titan X.
No matter how you slice it, SLI it (your rig)... 4K at 60Hz is still 4K stuck at 60Hz. No thank you.
Does not make sense to "downscale" from 4K to any resolution... I see what you are saying but, like RedJaron stated it's so close to 1440p, it's negligible.
The optimal way to for someone to use DSR is with a lower rez monitor going up... otherwise, money ill spent on a 4k $1K monitor. Just my opinion.
I get what you're saying. 480, 720, and 1080 were all a factor of 1.5 from each other. Why break trend now? And I'm not saying the downscaled picture doesn't look good to you. Just remember than some people have sharper eyes than others, and what looks fine to one can be a fuzzy mess to another.
Until monitors arrive with DP 1.4 and panels fast enough ti support it, I can't seen investing $1200 for the "long term", then the technology will be obsoleted in a matter of months.
And lets please make a very important distinction ... while IPS panels do have better viewing angles and color than TN panels .... and very few of them are fast enough for gaming.
I think you answered your own question.
Graphics power is limited. It's true, it's true.
Otherwise ppl would be barfing much less in their VR headsets right.
And I don't think 4K 60hz monitors will be obsolete soon.
http://www.144hzmonitors.com/monitors/asus-computex-2016-27-inch-4k-144hz-gaming-monitor/
Agreed. I have the ROG Swift which I use mostly for CSGO and Dog fights on War Thunder. I use my LG 3440x1440 Ultrawide for graphic design, video production, and Sid Meiers Civilization V or Total War Warhammer.
I think the ultimate gaming setup would include a 144 Hz - 165 Hz Ultrawide 3440x1440 personally. I have a feeling we will see it within the next year *fingers crossed*
4K at that frame rate is a ways off at the moment.