Acer XF250Q 24.5" 240hz Full HD LED Monitor £199.98 @ Ebuyer
335°Expired

Acer XF250Q 24.5" 240hz Full HD LED Monitor £199.98 @ Ebuyer

£199.98Ebuyer Deals
33
Found 18th Apr
Seems like a good price for a 240hz monitor. Not necessarily for everyday users but may be of interest to gamers. Has VESA mount capability.

Display

  • 24.5" Screen
  • LED Backlight
  • TN Panel
  • 1920 x 1080 Full HD
  • 1ms Response time
  • 240Hz refresh rate
  • 16:9 Aspect ratio
  • 16.7m Colour Support
  • 400 cd/m² brightness
  • 100,000,000:1 Contrast ratio
  • 170° horizontal / 160° vertical viewing angle


Connectivity

  • 1 x DVI
  • 1 x HDMI
  • 1 x DisplayPort
  • 5 x USB 3.0
Community Updates

Groups

33 Comments
240Hz??? Aren't they usually priced way more? Also what's the screen like? I'm not so familiar with monitor screens... Does it have an annoying glare? I need a monitor with less glare and easier on the eyes. The 240Hz got me intrigued as I was looking for a 144Hz few months ago for Quake haha
Sufz15 m ago

240Hz??? Aren't they usually priced way more? Also what's the screen like? …240Hz??? Aren't they usually priced way more? Also what's the screen like? I'm not so familiar with monitor screens... Does it have an annoying glare? I need a monitor with less glare and easier on the eyes. The 240Hz got me intrigued as I was looking for a 144Hz few months ago for Quake haha


Cheapest i could find this one elsewhere was £280 at laptops direct. It states it has an anti-glare screen coating and gives it a gimmicky name but basically still anti-glare.
From the research I've done personally, 240hz is good to get if you either have a decent PC to run it from or if you are wanting to get a monitor to use with a future PC. You always have people who claim they can't see a difference and others saying they can see a difference.
Decent price for this but for gaming it isn't G-Sync so that's why it's a bit cheaper.Still would be ok for some though and as mentioned by another person, 240hz does require a decent PC and Graphic card combo or it's pointless.

Heat added.
Would rather be at 1440p 144hz but if you're a SUPER competitive gamer with a top end PC(8700k+1080ti) then this is a great price.
Zombie_MV12 m ago

Would rather be at 1440p 144hz but if you're a SUPER competitive gamer …Would rather be at 1440p 144hz but if you're a SUPER competitive gamer with a top end PC(8700k+1080ti) then this is a great price.


Likewise, I'm after a decent 1440p 144hz but saw this as I was trawling through and thought it may help someone out.
N1ghtwolf8918th Apr

Likewise, I'm after a decent 1440p 144hz but saw this as I was trawling …Likewise, I'm after a decent 1440p 144hz but saw this as I was trawling through and thought it may help someone out.


I'm in the same boat. Would like a 1440p 144hz 27" but prices are crazy. Thinking of settling for something like this until prices drop. Let me know if you find anything.
Temped.. I already have a 144HZ TN AOC monitor but... perhaps upgrade? Was hoping for IPS
thegamingkinginfo2 h, 21 m ago

Temped.. I already have a 144HZ TN AOC monitor but... perhaps upgrade? Was …Temped.. I already have a 144HZ TN AOC monitor but... perhaps upgrade? Was hoping for IPS


I'm not sure the jump from 144hz to 240hz is as "night and day" as 60hz to 144hz. I think you would be better upgrading to a decent IPS panel and / or an up in res for greater impact.
Currently £288 on Amazon, would buy if they price match. I would much rather deal with Amazon customer service than ebuyers
CopaceticAnswers5 m ago

Currently £288 on Amazon, would buy if they price match. I would much …Currently £288 on Amazon, would buy if they price match. I would much rather deal with Amazon customer service than ebuyers


The one at 288.36 is the better model. This one is 299.99 on Amazon. I'm also hoping for a price match.
Just to be warned, you will not be able to play your consoles at 30FPS after using something like this
Avatar
deleted488782
Great deal...
240Hz? I really don't see the point.

Normal desktop use? Don't need it.

Gaming? Good luck getting games to run anywhere near 240fps to take advantage of it, it's pointless.
ebilcake118 m ago

240Hz? I really don't see the point. Normal desktop use? Don't need …240Hz? I really don't see the point. Normal desktop use? Don't need it.Gaming? Good luck getting games to run anywhere near 240fps to take advantage of it, it's pointless.


Probably more for the esports scene, CSGO would easily run at 240hz on alot of modern cards for example
This price is so low it actually worries me :). I can't seem to find anything on blurbusters on this. Anyone found any proper geek reviews anywhere(testing of frame skipping, latency at different parts of the screen etc).



ebilcake152 m ago

240Hz? I really don't see the point. Normal desktop use? Don't need …240Hz? I really don't see the point. Normal desktop use? Don't need it.Gaming? Good luck getting games to run anywhere near 240fps to take advantage of it, it's pointless.


Everything above 24fps is wasted electricity! This is clearly 10 times faster than it needs to be. Madness!
144hzmonitors.com/rev…qa/

Really decent review. This will be for gamers that play games that can hit 244fps like CSGO and Overwatch.

Dont forget it has Freesync and has a Vesa mount. I've bought one for my Bro.
Anyone gone for this? I am interested as I still love a bit of cs go. Anyone found any detailed reviews?
I think you need at least HDMI 2.0 to support 240 Hz - does the monitor support that? Or do you need DisplayPort (which requires v1.3)?

According to 144hzmonitors.com/rev…qa/, "The Acer XF250Q gaming monitor will also offer built-in speakers while the connector ports include a Dual-Link DVI, an HDMI 1.4, and a DisplayPort 1.2a for FreeSync."

That means you can only get 720p240, not 1080p240! Be warned.
Edited by: "MrPuddington" 18th Apr
MrPuddington14 m ago

I think you need at least HDMI 2.0 to support 240 Hz - does the monitor …I think you need at least HDMI 2.0 to support 240 Hz - does the monitor support that? Or do you need DisplayPort (which requires v1.3)?According to https://www.144hzmonitors.com/reviews/acer-xf250q-review-xf250qa/, "The Acer XF250Q gaming monitor will also offer built-in speakers while the connector ports include a Dual-Link DVI, an HDMI 1.4, and a DisplayPort 1.2a for FreeSync." That means you can only get 720p240, not 1080p240! Be warned.


This isn't true as looking at the manual I just downloaded from the acer website states 240hz on DP and HDMI only at 1080p. DVI is 144hz only at 1080p.
FactProvider19th Apr

Comment deleted


that is a different monitor
Back to full price again, please expire
robuk3609 h, 25 m ago

This isn't true as looking at the manual I just downloaded from the acer …This isn't true as looking at the manual I just downloaded from the acer website states 240hz on DP and HDMI only at 1080p. DVI is 144hz only at 1080p.


So as long as you have a graphics card with DP 1.2, you can reach 1080p at 240 Hz? That would make more sense, but I cannot find that confirmed anywhere.
MrPuddington45 m ago

So as long as you have a graphics card with DP 1.2, you can reach 1080p at …So as long as you have a graphics card with DP 1.2, you can reach 1080p at 240 Hz? That would make more sense, but I cannot find that confirmed anywhere.


In the manual it doesn't state the DP or HDMI versions used on this monitor, as the link you provided is a preview and not a review, maybe the information contained in the article isn't acurate. I don't know, but the manual states 240hz at 1080p on DP or HDMI.
Edited by: "robuk360" 19th Apr
MrPuddington13 h, 57 m ago

I think you need at least HDMI 2.0 to support 240 Hz - does the monitor …I think you need at least HDMI 2.0 to support 240 Hz - does the monitor support that? Or do you need DisplayPort (which requires v1.3)?According to https://www.144hzmonitors.com/reviews/acer-xf250q-review-xf250qa/, "The Acer XF250Q gaming monitor will also offer built-in speakers while the connector ports include a Dual-Link DVI, an HDMI 1.4, and a DisplayPort 1.2a for FreeSync." That means you can only get 720p240, not 1080p240! Be warned.


according to wiki: DP 1.2a should allow for 17.28 Gbit/s for video and 1080p240 should only require 14.00 Gbit/s. It is always worth checking for dodgy manufacturer claims though!

en.wikipedia.org/wik…ort


I'm not sure about that 144hzmonitors site. That review more reads as someone compared tech sheets rather than tested a monitor in person.
NomadJack18th Apr

Probably more for the esports scene, CSGO would easily run at 240hz on …Probably more for the esports scene, CSGO would easily run at 240hz on alot of modern cards for example


That's what? 6 years old? based on a game released back in 2004.

Time to move on maybe? What's it like trying to playing a new game at 240hz, good luck with that.
ebilcake11 h, 32 m ago

That's what? 6 years old? based on a game released back in 2004.Time to …That's what? 6 years old? based on a game released back in 2004.Time to move on maybe? What's it like trying to playing a new game at 240hz, good luck with that.


As the guy said it’s for esports titles. Yes the game engine maybe old but try telling half a million people who play the game everyday and the 13 million unique players that. I personally hit 600fps on this game with the resolution I play. But just because you don’t see the point. Doesn’t mean it’s bad for others. If you don’t play games that hit the high frames, yes stick to IPS 60hz etc.
ebilcake121 h, 18 m ago

That's what? 6 years old? based on a game released back in 2004.Time to …That's what? 6 years old? based on a game released back in 2004.Time to move on maybe? What's it like trying to playing a new game at 240hz, good luck with that.


But he just pointed out that it's not hoping to run new AAA games at 240hz. It's for esports games, where this sort of performance is most relevant and achievable. Think games like Dota, Starcraft, CS:GO, Overwatch, LoL etc. No one cares about this level of performance outside of the competitive gaming demographic.
Edited by: "ibz100" 20th Apr
ibz1001 h, 21 m ago

But he just pointed out that it's not hoping to run new AAA games at …But he just pointed out that it's not hoping to run new AAA games at 240hz. It's for esports games, where this sort of performance is most relevant and achievable. Think games like Dota, Starcraft, CS:GO, Overwatch, LoL etc. No one cares about this level of performance outside of the competitive gaming demographic.


Does anyone actually believe they need 240fps to be a competitive gamer? You don't, it's marketing rubbish.

A good framerate is important but only to a point, 240hz is ridiculous.

How do you think UT and Quake players managed back in the day? They managed just fine without these monitors.




.
ebilcake120th Apr

Does anyone actually believe they need 240fps to be a competitive gamer? …Does anyone actually believe they need 240fps to be a competitive gamer? You don't, it's marketing rubbish. A good framerate is important but only to a point, 240hz is ridiculous.How do you think UT and Quake players managed back in the day? They managed just fine without these monitors..


No, you don't need these products. They're fairly obviously the bleeding edge of technology and aimed at users that want to squeeze out every last ounce of competitive advantage they can get from their hardware. Your point about Quake doesn't hold water here because everyone back then will have been using 60hz monitors; they managed because they were competing on a far more level playing field. The appeal here isn't just the raw performance, it's equally the competitive advantage it gives you.

Jake of the Houston Outlaws hit top 500 on the OW competitive ladder playing on a VMd macbook pro at 30fps and 720p, and EQO who currently plays for the Philadelphia Fusion peaked at number 1 on the same ladder with the same low level hardware. And these aren't ancient examples, OW isn't even 2 years old yet. By their example, would you try to convince potential buyers that they don't even need full HD or hardware capable of 60fps to compete? No, because the vast majority of players you're competing against will have a competitive advantage over you if you don't meet them on that hardware level. Is it necessary? No. Is it helpful? Most definitely.
ibz1003 h, 8 m ago

No, you don't need these products. They're fairly obviously the bleeding …No, you don't need these products. They're fairly obviously the bleeding edge of technology and aimed at users that want to squeeze out every last ounce of competitive advantage they can get from their hardware. Your point about Quake doesn't hold water here because everyone back then will have been using 60hz monitors; they managed because they were competing on a far more level playing field. The appeal here isn't just the raw performance, it's equally the competitive advantage it gives you. Jake of the Houston Outlaws hit top 500 on the OW competitive ladder playing on a VMd macbook pro at 30fps and 720p, and EQO who currently plays for the Philadelphia Fusion peaked at number 1 on the same ladder with the same low level hardware. And these aren't ancient examples, OW isn't even 2 years old yet. By their example, would you try to convince potential buyers that they don't even need full HD or hardware capable of 60fps to compete? No, because the vast majority of players you're competing against will have a competitive advantage over you if you don't meet them on that hardware level. Is it necessary? No. Is it helpful? Most definitely.


A lot of monitors back then would do higher than 60hz, up to 120hz at HD resolutions depending on the hardware so they definitely were not all stuck at 60hz.

But that's somewhat irrelevant, the perceived mouse smoothness which is desirable for competitive gaming is linked to framerate and not necessarily the refreshrate, a lot of people have trouble understanding this.

Lets just say beyond a certain point the gains are just not worth it anymore, 60/75 to 144 is justifiable, beyond that the differences are very subtle, unless you know what to look for most users wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
Edited by: "ebilcake1" 22nd Apr
ibz10022nd Apr

Your point about Quake doesn't hold water here because everyone back then …Your point about Quake doesn't hold water here because everyone back then will have been using 60hz monitors


You must be young. Back in the Quake and Unreal Tournament days, we had CRTs that ran at 85-140hz @ 1024x768, or even higher at 800x600 or god forbid, 640x480. It was actually one of the main reasons it took so long for TFT monitors to get adopted by gamers. They only ran at 60hz and most of them ghosted terribly.

I tried 3 different 17" ones, they went straight back to the shops and I stuck to my 21" CRT (boy that was huuuuge and heavy!)
Lahn9 h, 49 m ago

You must be young. Back in the Quake and Unreal Tournament days, we had …You must be young. Back in the Quake and Unreal Tournament days, we had CRTs that ran at 85-140hz @ 1024x768, or even higher at 800x600 or god forbid, 640x480. It was actually one of the main reasons it took so long for TFT monitors to get adopted by gamers. They only ran at 60hz and most of them ghosted terribly.I tried 3 different 17" ones, they went straight back to the shops and I stuck to my 21" CRT (boy that was huuuuge and heavy!)


Yeah I'm young, but the point still stands. It's about competitive advantage rather than raw performance.
ibz10014 h, 58 m ago

Yeah I'm young, but the point still stands. It's about competitive …Yeah I'm young, but the point still stands. It's about competitive advantage rather than raw performance.


I agree with you that it isn't necessary, and it does give a competitive advantage over people with slower monitors, but even for single player games, it is just nicer to play a game that feels smoother too. Obviously some people prefer eye candy with AA and AF and IPS @ 60hz over higher frames/hz monitors, but that's subjective (and even dependent on the game genres if you ask me)
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text