Acer CB271HK 27" 3840x2160 4ms Wide 4K UHD IPS DVI LED Monitor £269.98 delivered @ BT Shop
297°Expired

Acer CB271HK 27" 3840x2160 4ms Wide 4K UHD IPS DVI LED Monitor £269.98 delivered @ BT Shop

37
Found 24th Aug 2016
293.50 was a good deal for this but this is an astonishingly low price for an ultra HD monitor. Probably near the best value for this type of screen atm.

Comes with 3 years of warranty too

37 Comments

Surprising lack of reviews, did anyone actually buy it last time it was on offer?

Glix

Surprising lack of reviews, did anyone actually buy it last time it was … Surprising lack of reviews, did anyone actually buy it last time it was on offer?



​Agreed. Cheap but the lack of reviews puts me off

I just got the 24" version of this model, i was also concerned by the lack of reviews.

Thankfully i was pleasantly surprised. Acer seem to have finally stepped up their game and this is actually a really decent monitor, far better than i was expecting.

Solid build quality, nice & sharp & clear clean with decent colour. Only downside is the speakers which are pretty horrible quality but then again i don't intend to use the monitor for audio so it's not a problem.
Edited by: "FlappyPappy" 25th Aug 2016

it'll be 60hz, they can't undercut the predator screens by having this 144hz/165

FlappyPappy

I just got the 24" version of this model, i was also concerned by the … I just got the 24" version of this model, i was also concerned by the lack of reviews. Thankfully i was pleasantly surprised. Acer seem to have finally stepped up their game and this is actually a really decent monitor, far better than i was expecting. Solid build quality, nice & sharp & clear clean with decent colour. Only downside is the speakers which are pretty horrible quality but then again i don't intend to use the monitor for audio so it's not a problem.



​With the lack of reviews I just have to ask you, is it any good for gaming?

better buy it before its gone

jaydalawd

it'll be 60hz, they can't undercut the predator screens by having this … it'll be 60hz, they can't undercut the predator screens by having this 144hz/165



Are there any 4k screens that go above 60Hz yet? Or any GPU's capable of driving that? Or even a cable that can do 4k at more than 60Hz? You need HDMI 2.0 or Displayport 1.2 just to get to 4k 60Hz.

realparadyne

Are there any 4k screens that go above 60Hz yet? Or any GPU's capable of … Are there any 4k screens that go above 60Hz yet? Or any GPU's capable of driving that? Or even a cable that can do 4k at more than 60Hz? You need HDMI 2.0 or Displayport 1.2 just to get to 4k 60Hz.



Titan X Pascal can bare get 60Hz on stock clocks...

For people thinking of buying 4k at 27", be preferred to increase scaling in Windows.

Sweet spot for 4K seems to be 32" and above.

And good luck trying to find a GPU that will power it at decent settings/frames without taking out a mortgage

4k is pretty limited benefit at 27 inches, I'd go 1440p max at that size.

jony_bobo

And good luck trying to find a GPU that will power it at decent … And good luck trying to find a GPU that will power it at decent settings/frames without taking out a mortgage



980ti is dropping in price now, and will do OK with 4k. But you won't be running everything on max, but it should be decent on most games. Same with the 1070. Not sure which is cheaper?

But you realty want a 1080 to do 4k justice. Or a Titan if you have money to burn.

I'm on a 980ti at the moment so waiting for 1080ti. Standard 1080 doesn't feel like enough of a jump to me (given the cost) and the Titan is silly money.

having 4k on a small 27'' is silly

The problem is that they do not cover the pixels as the warranty stated.

sancheez

980ti is dropping in price now, and will do OK with 4k. But you won't be … 980ti is dropping in price now, and will do OK with 4k. But you won't be running everything on max, but it should be decent on most games. Same with the 1070. Not sure which is cheaper?But you realty want a 1080 to do 4k justice. Or a Titan if you have money to burn.I'm on a 980ti at the moment so waiting for 1080ti. Standard 1080 doesn't feel like enough of a jump to me (given the cost) and the Titan is silly money.



Yeah, it seems kinda pointless to upgrade from 1440p to 2160p and then turn down the graphics quality. End result isn't really as good.

Got my predator 2k IPS 165hz a few days ago it's lush and needs to be for the money ! 970 wasn't pushing it enough so got a 1070 coming today ! The joys of the PC master race lol ! Don't tell the wife !.
Edited by: "Panda221" 25th Aug 2016

ro53ben

Yeah, it seems kinda pointless to upgrade from 1440p to 2160p and then … Yeah, it seems kinda pointless to upgrade from 1440p to 2160p and then turn down the graphics quality. End result isn't really as good.



It's VR for me.

The Titan did seriously tempt me, despite the insane price. But VR *NEEDS* a ton of GFX grunt. Roll on the 1080ti. My 980ti is doing a decent job just now. But I want it doing an AWESOME job.

I've never gone above 60hz so maybe I'm missing out on 144hz, but I rarely play anything other than Cities Skylines / FIFA / strategy type things, and the rest of the time it's a work PC.

If you play loads of shooters or whatever, maybe you want the faster frame rate, but for everyone else I'd say 4K at 27" is really good. You need to turn the scaling up in Windows, mines at 150%. The difference is like when they first brought out Retina display on iPhones, you really notice how much smoother everything looks.

You probably need to sit at a desk rather than sit back to see any benefit of the resolution at this size. Looking forward to upgrading to a 1070 but I'm not really having any problems with the 970.

I would have bought this if it had FreeSync. No way can you push 4K gaming on a budget card otherwise. It costs almost nothing to implement it so it's disappointing. Still seems like a good deal so have some heat.
Edited by: "ttttd" 25th Aug 2016

Much Cheaper are Ebuyer

I've got a 390x and looking to buy a new bigger monitor than my 22inch monitor, I mostly play World of warcraft and Overwatch so my question is would this monitor be good enough with that graphic card? Appreciate any reply. Cheers.
Edited by: "Gore" 25th Aug 2016

Looks decent, supports HDMI2 and Display port so it should work on old graphics cards. You don't have to run games at full resolution, 4k on 27" is so high res you can scale games with very little reduction in image quality.

Gore

I've got a 390x and looking to buy a new bigger monitor than my 22inch … I've got a 390x and looking to buy a new bigger monitor than my 22inch monitor, I mostly play World of warcraft and Overwatch so my question is would this monitor be good enough with that graphic card? Appreciate any reply. Cheers.



The monitor will be fine. But gaming quality will vary depending on the game.

WoW - should be OK if this is correct: techpowerup.com/rev…tml

... 70+ FPS @ 4k on Ultra settings apparently.

Overwatch might be a bit more of a struggle going by this: gamersnexus.net/gam…sts

... not surprising as it's newer and FPS.

And you don't say what the rest of your build is like. As that will affect it.

save your money and buy a 1440p 144hz monitor if you are a gamer. At 27" It is a waste of the extra pixels for the loss of a lot of frames.

Bought it. 100% sRGB and 4K at this price is incredible. Mainly photo and video with light gaming. Worst case scenario play at 1080p for perfect 4-1 downscale.

sancheez

It's VR for me.The Titan did seriously tempt me, despite the insane … It's VR for me.The Titan did seriously tempt me, despite the insane price. But VR *NEEDS* a ton of GFX grunt. Roll on the 1080ti. My 980ti is doing a decent job just now. But I want it doing an AWESOME job.



VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs... wait a minute...yes you really said this.

OK I'm being facetious. I have a Galaxy S6, it does VR spectacularly well, it has the graphical grunt of a neutered frog in mating season. The main issue with VR is resolution, my phone churns out a better VR resolution than the Oculus on PC and even 1440p is nowhere near good enough. 8K has to be the minimum resolution for VR, yes VR is incredibly immersive with 1080/1440p resolutions but the inadequacies of the resolution are really really apparent and a huge letdown to the technology. I only plan to come back to VR once we get 8K resolutions and phones will get there long before PC/Desktops do.

fishmaster

VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR … VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs... wait a minute...yes you really said this. OK I'm being facetious. I have a Galaxy S6, it does VR spectacularly well, it has the graphical grunt of a neutered frog in mating season. The main issue with VR is resolution, my phone churns out a better VR resolution than the Oculus on PC and even 1440p is nowhere near good enough. 8K has to be the minimum resolution for VR, yes VR is incredibly immersive with 1080/1440p resolutions but the inadequacies of the resolution are really really apparent and a huge letdown to the technology. I only plan to come back to VR once we get 8K resolutions and phones will get there long before PC/Desktops do.



Someone may want to correct me, but across both eyes the GPU has to render a lot more than 2k pixels in the galaxy The GPU also needs to render both screens required for vr at 90hz to prevent motion sickness.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not an apples to apples comparison.

fishmaster

VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR … VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs a ton of graphics grunt? VR needs... wait a minute...yes you really said this. OK I'm being facetious. I have a Galaxy S6, it does VR spectacularly well, it has the graphical grunt of a neutered frog in mating season. The main issue with VR is resolution, my phone churns out a better VR resolution than the Oculus on PC and even 1440p is nowhere near good enough. 8K has to be the minimum resolution for VR, yes VR is incredibly immersive with 1080/1440p resolutions but the inadequacies of the resolution are really really apparent and a huge letdown to the technology. I only plan to come back to VR once we get 8K resolutions and phones will get there long before PC/Desktops do.



lol

I have a i7-6700 + 980ti + Vive.

I also have a Nexus 6p and a Bobo VR holder for it. (Which is about as good as they get short of a Gear VR)

There is no comparison. The phone stuff is not even close to being in the same league.

sancheez

lolI have a i7-6700 + 980ti + Vive.I also have a Nexus 6p and a Bobo VR … lolI have a i7-6700 + 980ti + Vive.I also have a Nexus 6p and a Bobo VR holder for it. (Which is about as good as they get short of a Gear VR)There is no comparison. The phone stuff is not even close to being in the same league.



I like the Vive, I've seen JackSepticEye playing quite a few games on it for example. The resolution is still not good enough. VR needs 8K. I haven't used the Vive as I admit and from what I've seen I don't understand why it needs such GPU horsepower, that's something you could explain to me.

fishmaster

lolI have a i7-6700 + 980ti + Vive.I also have a Nexus 6p and a Bobo VR … lolI have a i7-6700 + 980ti + Vive.I also have a Nexus 6p and a Bobo VR holder for it. (Which is about as good as they get short of a Gear VR)There is no comparison. The phone stuff is not even close to being in the same league.




He was talking about raw resolution. The PC stuff looks far better due to much much more GPU power as well as clever lens design and nicer panel features.



Edited by: "ReckIess" 25th Aug 2016

ReckIess

Bought it. 100% sRGB and 4K at this price is incredible. Mainly photo and … Bought it. 100% sRGB and 4K at this price is incredible. Mainly photo and video with light gaming. Worst case scenario play at 1080p for perfect 4-1 downscale.



​unfortunately 1080p on 4k looks rubbish despite perfect ratios. I used to play 1080 on a 4k gaming laptop and it was not very sharp at all, and I'm not just comparing 1080p to 4k. I now have a dell 1440p and 144hz with sli 1080s, it's a perfect match. though would really like a ultrawide 1440 g-sync. pity they're £1k

Anyone able to help me out on finding the right monitor for me.

Ive been out of the building a PC game for a good while and just put together a desktop here is my system
uk.pcpartpicker.com/lis…htJ

Ive been out the loop way before even 4k come about! im looking for a resonably priced gaming monitor Ive been using a 24" mac screen for ages so something between 27-30" Would be perfect for me.

Anyone suggest some monitors for me?

From further research it looks like this is the same panel as the Xb271HK just without a g-sync module.

longback2

​unfortunately 1080p on 4k looks rubbish despite perfect ratios. I used t … ​unfortunately 1080p on 4k looks rubbish despite perfect ratios. I used to play 1080 on a 4k gaming laptop and it was not very sharp at all, and I'm not just comparing 1080p to 4k. I now have a dell 1440p and 144hz with sli 1080s, it's a perfect match. though would really like a ultrawide 1440 g-sync. pity they're £1k



I think you'll find that if you compared a native 4K screen at 1080p to a native 1080p panel of the same size you'll find that it would be exactly the same. AFAIK monitors all have square pixels so 4 of them would equate directly to 1, I thought the same when I use to downscale my retina display to 1/4 res and it looked awful but that was only because I was used to the retina-ness and comparing it to a non retina model yielded no difference.

ReckIess

I think you'll find that if you compared a native 4K screen at 1080p to a … I think you'll find that if you compared a native 4K screen at 1080p to a native 1080p panel of the same size you'll find that it would be exactly the same. AFAIK monitors all have square pixels so 4 of them would equate directly to 1, I thought the same when I use to downscale my retina display to 1/4 res and it looked awful but that was only because I was used to the retina-ness and comparing it to a non retina model yielded no difference.



​i wouldn't be alone in saying native resolution is always king, regardless of perfect ratios 1080 on 4k doesn't look as good as 1080 native. 4k monitors for gaming are not ideal the moment. no point in 4kunless all settings are ultra IMO, and to do that takes the very top GPUs which won't necessarily keep up with new releases.

Also worth mentioning that the texture details in some games simply aren't up to 4k. I can play many old games at 1440p, put all I'm getting it upscaled 1080p (or lower) textures.

I wonder what proportion of games come with a genuine 4k texture pack?

urgh when will a 2k one come on offer, not fussed about 4k..
Edited by: "Martyn334" 28th Aug 2016

Leepox

save your money and buy a 1440p 144hz monitor if you are a gamer. At 27" … save your money and buy a 1440p 144hz monitor if you are a gamer. At 27" It is a waste of the extra pixels for the loss of a lot of frames.



​Buying a 1440p freesync 144 Hz monitor will cost you more than the price of this. I've just bought the Acer XF 27 " monitor and it cost me £380. Worth the money though. Believe me once you experience freesync there's no going back it's awesome.

People who bought this monitor: can you share your comments and impression about the monitor?
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text