Author: Adam Simmons
Date published: June 22nd 2023
Table of Contents
Introduction
A key part of a convincing HDR (High Dynamic Range) experience on a monitor is the ability to simultaneously display deep dark shades and brilliant bright shades. For LCDs, this requires the use of a backlight with a good number of dimming zones. The Acer X32 FP (X32 FPbmiiiiphuzx) of the Predator series of gaming monitors offers this, with its 576-zone Mini LED backlight referred to by the panel manufacturer as ‘AmLED’ (Adaptive Mini LED). This is combined with a 160Hz ‘4K’ UHD panel alongside HDMI 2.1 support – broadening the appeal for console gaming and allowing ‘4K’ UHD @120Hz for not just PCs but also the PS5 and Xbox Series X. We take this monitor for a spin with our usual testing regime, including in-game testing, movie watching and desktop usage.
Specifications
The monitor uses a 32” IPS (In-Plane Switching) type panel, more specifically an AUO AHVA (Advanced Hyper-Viewing Angle) panel. This has a 3840 x 2160 resolution and supports a 160Hz refresh rate plus 10-bit colour. A 1ms or ‘0.7ms min’ grey to grey response time is specified, which as usual you should pay little attention to. Some of the key ‘talking points’ for this monitor have been highlighted in blue below, for your reading convenience.
The monitor has a sharp-lined design as typical for Predator models. The stand base includes two legs and a central straight edge for stability – it’s silver-coloured coated metal, giving a reasonably weighty and premium ‘feel’ to things. This extended to the whole screen, which felt firmly attached to the stand without any real wobble to speak of if the screen is tapped from the edges. The bottom bezel is dark matte plastic – ~21mm (0.83 inches) thick. The top and side bezels have a dual-stage design with reasonably slim panel border flush with the rest of the screen plus slender hard plastic outer part. Including both components, the bezels are ~9mm (0.35 inches) at the sides and ~8mm (0.31 inches) at the top. The main focus at the front is the screen itself, which has a light to very light matte anti-glare finish as we explore shortly. Apparent ‘blooming’ in the image is on the photograph itself, not from the monitor. The OSD (On Screen Display) is controlled by a joystick and accompanying buttons at the rear of the screen, towards the right side as viewed from the front. A power LED is located on the bottom bezel, towards the right side, glowing blue when the monitor is on and amber when it enters a low power state (e.g. signal to the system is lost). The video below runs through the menu system including a brief look at various presets, KVM functionality and the ‘Refresh Rate Num’ which indicates frame rate with VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) active. It also explores the changes we made for our ‘Test Settings’, covered later in the review. The images below show the refresh rates supported for the native 3840 x 2160 (‘4K’ UHD) resolution. The first image shows the resolutions categorised in the EDID of the monitor as ‘TV’ resolutions and listed here under ‘Ultra HD, HD, SD’. The second image shows resolutions categorised in the EDID and listed here as ‘PC’ resolutions. This includes 3840 x 2160 @120Hz, which can be used by the Xbox Series X and PS5 via HDMI 2.1. Note that both lists are the same via suitable revisions of DP and HDMI. The image below is a macro photograph taken on Notepad with ClearType disabled. The letters ‘PCM’ are typed out to help highlight any potential text rendering issues related to unusual subpixel structure, whilst the white space more clearly shows the actual subpixel layout alongside a rough indication of screen surface. This model uses a light to very light matte anti-glare screen surface, which provides decent glare handling without as much layering in front of the image as some matte screen surfaces, alongside better maintenance of clarity and vibrancy potential. In brighter conditions and particularly with bright light striking the screen directly, sharper glare patches can sometimes be observed which gives a ‘glassy’ look to the screen. The monitor doesn’t diffuse light as heavily as some matte screen surfaces, so there isn’t as much ‘hazing’ or ‘flooding’ of the image – though this can still occur in bright conditions and isn’t avoided entirely as it can be with glossy screen surfaces. The screen surface has a fairly grainy finish, something that could be described as a slightly sandy appearance but without the course or ‘smeary’ graininess that some matte surfaces provide. The X32 FP includes various presets in the OSD, referred to by the manufacturer as ‘Modes’; ‘Action (G1)’, ‘Racing (G2), ‘Sports (G3), ‘User’, ‘Standard’, ‘ECO’ and ‘Graphics’. There’s also a dedicated ‘HDR’ preset which is automatically used by the monitor as the only available preset when an HDR signal is used. The SDR presets simply change a range of settings in the OSD and don’t achieve anything you couldn’t achieve with manual adjustment. If you make manual adjustments to most settings in any mode under SDR (including but not limited to brightness, contrast or colour channels) that then becomes the ‘User’ preset. The idea is that you then save your settings to one of the 3 presets in the list (G1, G2 and G3 for short) as they allow you to easily save and recall 3 sets of preferred settings. A notable exception is that colour channel changes (‘Color Temp.’ set to ‘User’) are applied universally (including under HDR), so you can’t have different custom colour channel adjustments and easily recall them. The ‘Max Brightness’ setting is also applied universally, as is ‘Adaptive-Dimming’. It would’ve been much more convenient if all settings were saved and recalled using ‘G1’, ‘G2’ and ‘G3’, but sadly they aren’t. We run through this preset system in the OSD video, but for the purposes of this table we’ll simply focus on a range of manual adjustments instead. The table provides gamma and white point readings taken using a Datacolor SpyderX Elite colorimeter, alongside general observations. Our test system uses Windows 11 with an Nvidia RTX 3090 connected using the supplied DisplayPort cable. Additional testing was performed via HDMI and also using an AMD Radeon RX 580, though observations on this table didn’t differ significantly between inputs or GPUs. The monitor was left to run for over 2 hours before readings were taken and observations made, without any additional monitor drivers or ICC profiles specifically loaded. Aside from our ‘Test Settings’, where various adjustments were made, assume factory defaults were used with the monitor initially set to ‘Standard’. The exception was that ‘Max Brightness’ was set to ‘On’ in the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD. This is disabled by default for energy saving reasons, which restricts the brightness of the screen if brightness is set above ‘0’ in the OSD. The refresh rate was set to 160Hz in Windows, although this didn’t significantly affect the values or observations in this table. When viewing the figures in this table, note that for most PC users ‘6500K’ for white point and ‘2.2’ for gamma are good targets to aim for. Individual targets depend on individual uses, tastes and the lighting environment, however. Because of the very strong peak of red and green energy you may find the monitor ‘spectrally unbalanced’ when viewing it beside a monitor with significantly narrower colour gamut, even if both are calibrated to ‘6500K’ and with neutral green channels. Feel free to target a higher white point or make appropriate colour channel adjustments to compensate. Note that this issue isn’t unique to the Acer – it’s always difficult to closely match monitors with very different spectral profiles. This isn’t an issue when viewing the monitor in isolation, your eyes should compensate appropriately. Out of the box and set to its ‘Standard’ preset, the monitor provided a highly vibrant image using its full native gamut. It was a touch warm, but reasonably well balanced in that respect. The monitor tracked the ‘2.2’ gamma curve well overall, just slightly lower than target centrally and for brighter shades, which can slightly brighten shades up and make very bright shades slightly less distinct from one another. And very slightly higher for some dark shades, making them a bit deeper and very slightly reducing some dark detail distinction. Again, these are minor deviations which didn’t cause clear issues. The graph below shows gamma tracking under out ‘Test Settings’ which offered similar gamma tracking to the factory defaults under ‘Standard’. Gamma tracking using the ‘sRGB’ mode is very similar to this, but a bit tighter to the 2.2 curve for very bright shades. Note that the graph just gives a general idea of gamma behaviour but lacks the precision or resolution to clearly show the slight deviations for very bright and dark shades. Given the intended uses for the monitor, inter-unit variation and pleasing performance on our unit with OSD tweaking alone we won’t be using any ICC profiles in this review or including any measurements or graphs using them. We wouldn’t recommend using them unless created for your specific unit using your own calibration device. But we appreciate some users still like to use profiles and some aspects such as gamut mapping for colour-aware applications can be useful. You can download our ICC profile for this model, which was created using our ‘Test Settings’ as a base. You can also download our sRGB profile which was created using and designed for the ‘Color Space = sRGB’ setting. Be aware of inter-unit variation and note again that these ICC profiles are not used in the review. We prefer to analyse things in a more visual and qualitative way, but using the ‘sRGB’ setting we can confirm an average DeltaE of 1.23 within the sRGB colour space recorded with our SpyderX Elite, using the same 24 test patches analysed visually deeper into the review (SpyderCHECKR 24). Note that shade 1F (cerulean) is often recorded with a high error in this test. This is a respectable result, although doesn’t live up to Acer’s claimed average DeltaE <1. The factory calibration report suggested an average DeltaE <1, but the colour accuracy section of the report appears to include standardised or ‘sample’ measurements which are identical for all units. With respect to the actual calibration, it’s performed at a different time (colour temperature drifts somewhat over time) using different equipment, different software and a different shade set which can lead to different results in our testing compared to what the manufacturer claims. The monitor includes a ‘Low Blue Light’ (LBL) setting which is set to ‘Standard’ by default, presumably as a nod towards the balanced spectral output (and hence relative reduction in blue light output) provided by the QD LED backlight. Additional filtering levels are available, with ‘Level 4’ having the strongest effect. This is an effective LBL mode which provides a warmer and moderately green tinted look to the image – the red channel is strong, green channel moderately strong and blue channel reduced significantly. Your eyes adjust to the tints to some extent after using the setting for a bit. We used this setting for our own viewing comfort in the evenings, with reduced brightness, but not for specific testing beyond that involving this setting. The warm look to the image is considered more relaxing by some and can be particularly important in the hours leading up to sleep. We assigned the setting to one of the numbered ‘G’ presets so we could easily switch between this and our ‘Test Settings’. For our ‘Test Settings’ we used the ‘Standard’ preset as a base but lowered brightness and made some colour channel adjustments. Remember that the preset becomes ‘User’ after adjustments are made. ‘Adaptive Dimming’ was disabled in the OSD, except where required for specific testing. Note that individual units and preferences vary, so these settings are simply a suggestion and won’t be optimal for all users or units. We’ve also included the refresh rate used in Windows and our preferred ‘Over Drive’ setting with the monitor set to that refresh rate, just for reference. These settings only apply to SDR, HDR has separate settings associated with it and is explored in the relevant sections of the review. Our preference for HDR was to keep things in their default state with ‘Color Temp’ set to ‘Warm’, ‘Super Sharpness’ disabled and ‘Adaptive Dimming’ set to ‘Average’. Mode = Standard Brightness = 36 (according to preferences and lighting) Max Brightness = On Color Temp. = User R Gain = 48 G Gain = 48 B Gain = 50 Over Drive = Normal FreeSync Premium Pro = On Refresh rate (Windows setting) = 160Hz Note that the firmware can be upgraded via Acer’s support page for the monitor. The latest firmware available at time of review was used on our unit (2.00.015). Instructions on how to upgrade the firmware are included in a PDF included with the original update file (2.00.010), so we’d recommend downloading that one as well if you’re not familiar with the procedure. It’s a simple procedure that involves the use of a USB stick, but it must be followed correctly. Including making sure you use the USB port furthest from the power input and disconnect all display cables from the monitor (as guided in the text, but not shown in the images). The monitor will give you a message on the screen when the process is complete. An X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus (Calibrite ColorChecker Display Plus) was used to measure the luminance of white and black using various settings, including those found in the calibration section. From these values, static contrast ratios were calculated. The table below shows these results. Blue highlights indicate the results under our ‘Test Settings’ and with HDR active. Black highlights indicate the highest white luminance, lowest black luminance and highest contrast ratio recorded under SDR, with ‘Adaptive Dimming’ disabled. Assume any setting not mentioned was left at default, with the exceptions already noted here or in the calibration section – including ‘Max Brightness’ being enabled. Some values in the table are approximate, designated with relevant symbols. This is due to a lack of precision from the measurement instrument for black luminance readings, which significantly affects the measured contrast in some cases, including if the black point is low. **These readings were taken using the above test. A reading was taken using a white screen fill (‘all pixels’), 30 seconds after it was displayed. This is used to represent the sustained luminance level the monitor can provide under HDR, rather than the peak luminance achieved for smaller sections of the screen. Because the entire screen is white for this test, black luminance levels can’t be read and an HDR contrast reading can’t be ascertained. ***These are the highest readings taken for the sun glint on the water surface of this scene from Shadow of the Tomb Raider and the sun in the sky on this scene from Battlefield V. For practicality and to ensure a good peak reading with maximal sensor area coverage, we allowed slight repositioning of the character and perspective change from what is shown in the screenshots. The overall makeup of the scene remained roughly as shown, which is particularly important on models such as OLEDs where brightness can vary significantly depending on the overall levels of light and dark shade in the scene. ****These readings were taken in the same way as the HDR readings, except the monitor is running in SDR. The average static contrast with only brightness adjusted was 1191:1 (excluding values affected too heavily by rounding precision), which is decent for an IPS-type panel. The maximum contrast recorded under SDR (‘Adaptive Dimming’ disabled) was 1220:1 and under our ‘Test Settings’ was a respectable 1107:1, with the colour channel adjustments we made dragging this down just a little. The adjustments made to ‘Low Blue Light = Level 4’ are significant and slightly reduced contrast, to 1036:1. The maximum white luminance recorded under SDR was 487 cd/m², whilst the minimum was 4 cd/m². This gives a brightness adjustment range of 483 cd/m² with a nice bright maximum and a very low minimum. The ‘AmLED’ (Adaptive Mini LED) backlight with 576 zones can be put to use by enabling ‘Adaptive-Dimming’. There are 3 different levels, although some of the key differences between these are not apparent in this table and are explored elsewhere. Under SDR this provided a very nice edge in contrast, with a maximum reading of 27,400:1 and similar peak luminance to HDR at full brightness (473 cd/m² with ‘100%’ brightness). An interesting quirk was observed here using the ‘Low’ setting, where the screen was reluctant to dim the backlight as much for the 49% white patch. Under HDR the brightness capability of the screen was heavily dependent on the content being displayed – a range of readings were taken under HDR which demonstrates this well, whilst it’s explored subjectively later on. You can also see from the readings that the backlight zones do dim effectively but don’t completely shut off, even when black content is displayed. In most normal content you get intricate enough shade mixtures in most scenes that the behaviour for large black masses isn’t really relevant. The HDR luminance data using various patch sizes for the 3 ‘Adaptive Dimming’ settings is shown in a graph below, for those preferring a graphical representation. A few reference screens are also included for comparison, the 31.5” Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 which uses a VA panel with 1196-zone Mini LED backlight and the Dell Alienware AW3423DW with 34” QD-OLED panel. The comparison with the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 is interesting as that is another model which likes to dark bias – but it doesn’t do so as heavily as the Acer. The natively strong contrast can work in its favour, so it can ‘get away with’ less aggressive dark biasing for some shade mixtures without compromising the depth of the darker shades in the same way as an IPS model might. Having around twice the density of dimming zones doesn’t hurt, either. The Acer can certainly sustain superior brightness levels where bright shades dominate, reflecting bright daylight scenes for example. This is why the graphs cross over, with the Acer having an edge in brightness at a 25% white patch, maintaining nearly twice the brightness at a 49% window size and nearly 3 times the sustained full screen white brightness. The Samsung seems to have a power limitation with its backlight that prevents it reaching high brightness where bright shades dominate on the screen. The QD-OLED has a similar limitation, employing an ABL (Automatic Brightness Limiter) which kicks in by a 9% patch size and even more aggressively beyond that. Because of its per-pixel illumination, it doesn’t need to worry about dark biasing for smaller bright areas, reaching its maximum brightness (1059 cd/m² vs. 657 cd/m² using the ‘Fast’ setting of the Acer) at a 1% patch size. The X32 FP does not use PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) to regulate backlight brightness at any brightness level, with DC (Direct Current) used to moderate brightness instead. The backlight is therefore considered ‘flicker-free’, which will come as welcome news to those sensitive to flickering or worried about side-effects from PWM usage. Whilst observing a black background in a dark room, using our ‘Test Settings’, we noticed slight backlight bleed and associated clouding. It’s important to remember that individual units vary when it comes to all aspects of uniformity, including backlight bleed and clouding. The following image was taken a few metres back to eliminate ‘IPS glow’. This was observed as a generally blue to cyan or purple haze, depending on angle, which is concentrated towards the corners of the screen. It’s quite colourful but less bright and intense than the ‘IPS glow’ you’d usually observe, particularly on a model of this size. This ‘IPS glow’ blooms out more strongly from steeper angles, as demonstrated in the viewing angles video later. As with most of our testing, we had the ‘Adaptive Dimming’ setting disabled here. With the setting active the dimming zones of the backlight dim to much lower levels as explored earlier. The luminance uniformity was very good overall. The maximum luminance was recorded at ‘quadrant 4’ to the left of centre (169.8 cd/m²). At 168.4 cd/m², the central point was just 1% dimmer than this. The greatest deviation from the brightest point occurred at ‘quadrant 3’ towards the top right (155.5 cd/m², which is 8% dimmer). The average deviation between each quadrant and the brightest point was 3.5%, which is strong. Note that individual units vary when it comes to uniformity and you can expect further deviation beyond the points measured. The contour map below shows these deviations graphically, with darker greys representing lower luminance (greater deviation from brightest point) than lighter greys. The percentage deviation between each quadrant and the brightest point recorded is also given. The SpyderX Elite was also used to analyse variation in the colour temperature (white point) for the same 9 quadrants. The deviation between each quadrant and the quadrant closest to the 6500K (D65) daylight white point target was analysed and a DeltaE value assigned. Darker shades are also used on this map to represent greater deviation from 6500K. A DeltaE >3 represents significant deviation that may be readily noticed by eye. The colour temperature deviation was moderate, with the top right recorded as closest to 6500K and significant but not extreme deviation recorded at various points (up to DeltaE 3.4, to the right of centre). Note again that individual units vary when it comes to uniformity and that you can expect deviation beyond the measured points. For example, our unit appeared significantly cooler (higher white point) near the extreme side edges and to a lesser extent top and bottom edges, closer to the bezel than the measurement points. It’s also worth noting that due to how wide the gamut is, deviation in colour temperature can appear more exaggerated than these sorts of measurements might suggest. When viewing large patches of bright shade such as white, warm regions can appear with more of a reddish tint than you might expect. And cool regions noticeably cool-tinted or slightly greenish in comparison. This wasn’t of particular concern on our unit, however. Note: These observations are with ‘Adaptive Dimming’ disabled. Observations with this setting enabled are explored separately. On Battlefield 2042 the monitor provided a reasonable contrast experience. The contrast was measured at 1107:1 under our ‘Test Settings’, a reasonable level for an IPS model. This wasn’t sufficient to provide a deep and atmospheric look to darker scenes and darker shades within scenes, so a far cry from OLED technology and also weaker than VA models in that respect. The usual haze of ‘IPS glow’ was reduced on this model – not entirely eliminated, but lower than expected – particularly given the size of the screen. It didn’t eat away at as much of the peripheral dark detail and atmosphere as we’d usually see from our regular viewing position. It mainly appeared blue or cyan to purple but was significantly dimmer than usual. We consider this a ‘low glow’ panel, though the ‘IPS glow’ that is there can be brought out more strongly on units with significant backlight bleed or clouding issues, if you sit closer to the screen or set it to a higher brightness. Contrast weaknesses were easiest to observe in dimmer lighting conditions, so some may find it helpful to have a bias light or at least some form of lighting behind the monitor if you like the room to be dimmer in general. This can also aid viewing comfort. The screen surface imparted some graininess or a bit of a ’sandy’ appearance when observing brighter shades, without obvious layering in front of the image. Similar observations were made on Shadow of the Tomb Raider when it came to contrast. Here, there are plenty of ‘high contrast’ scenes, where dark shades dominate and just a few point sources of light are visible. For example dark caves with a little light pouring in from outside. The monitor again fell short of giving such scenes an atmospheric look with deep and inky-looking dark shades. ‘IPS glow’ was again visible in places, but reduced compared to what we’d usually see. A notable strength of IPS-type panels like this compared to other LCD panel types is strong gamma consistency, something we appreciated on both titles. Whilst some dark detail is lost peripherally due to ‘IPS glow’, overall detail levels are maintained well throughout the rest of the screen. This contrasts with TN models which show clear vertical shifts in gamma and dark detail level, or VA models where there’s a loss of detail centrally (‘black crush’) and usually excessive detail peripherally. The screen surface again imparted a bit graininess when observing lighter content. We also made observations on the film Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. This is another title with a lot of ‘high contrast’ scenes – dark areas lit up with some distinct light sources. Lightsabers, pulses of energy and explosions amongst dark surroundings for example. The monitor again failed to provide a deep and atmospheric appearance here – but better than average for the panel type. This film is also presented in a letterboxed format with black bars at the top and bottom. These highlighted the contrast weaknesses, particularly if viewed in a dimmer room – there was some ‘IPS glow’ but at a somewhat reduced level. Much of the streamed content you’ll watch on platforms like Netflix, Disney Plus, Amazon Prime Video and certainly YouTube will be presented in 16:9 without these bars. The Lagom tests for contrast allow specific weaknesses in contrast performance to be identified. The following observations were made in a dark room. As noted earlier, the monitor includes a Mini LED backlight (FALD – Full Array Local Dimming) solution with 576 independently addressable zones. This is a key part of the HDR experience of the monitor, but can also be used under SDR to enhance the contrast experience. The setting is referred to as ‘Adaptive Dimming’ and can be found in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD and can be set to three levels; ‘Low’, ‘Average’ and ‘Fast’. 576 dimming zones isn’t exactly a staggering number, particularly for a 32” screen and it certainly doesn’t give you the same precision as you’d have with an OLED. With the per-pixel precision of OLED, you have ~8.3 million dimming zones. The solution can’t account for intricate mixtures of light and dark shades like an OLED could and doesn’t have the same capability in this respect as FALD solutions with a much greater dimming zone density. The ‘Low’ setting will strongly dark bias, meaning it will heavily favour dimming brighter shades over brightening dimmer shades where there are mixtures of lighter and darker shades covering a zone. It also transitions between dimming states more slowly, which can make some transitions appear less abrupt but can be less suitable for fast-moving content. The ‘Average’ and ‘Fast’ settings still dark bias quite strongly, particularly where dark shades are present, though less so than ‘Low’ where some medium shade depths were involved. Bright objects (like a mouse cursor or bright element in a game) against medium to medium-dark backgrounds will be sufficient to cause a ‘halo’ of brightening around the light object using ‘Average’ or ‘Fast’ which is much fainter for ‘Low’. This can also cause a ‘flickering’ effect during movement – the zones are very quick to react (brighten up or dim) as the content covering a particular zone changes with such shades present using the ‘Average’ and certainly ‘Fast’ setting. You may also observe a darkening of the background shade immediately surrounding the ‘halo’ and there are colour temperature changes in addition to brightness changes that affect perceived brightness (the ‘halo’ is cooler as well as brighter than the background shade). The ‘Fast’ setting will brighten up more than ‘Average’ and this behaviour is also more likely to trigger with somewhat less bright (though still bright) shades are set against a medium background. In practice we found ‘Average’ to be the best-balanced setting and stuck with this for most of our testing using this feature. Brightness can be adjusted when using the ‘Adaptive Dimming’ setting. We’d start by using a similar brightness to what you set the monitor to without using the setting and see how you find it, as that is a setting you will find comfortable and appropriate (you selected that brightness level for a reason). Though you may wish to adjust this depending on how dynamic you want things to be. Perhaps you want to use this setting to primarily enhance contrast and in particular achieve a deeper look to darker shades on the screen, whilst maintaining comfortable brightness for prolonged use. Or you might want brighter shades to appear brighter and more brilliant as well, in which case you’d ramp up the brightness. Remember that the dimming algorithm heavily dark biases to favour dimming the zones for extra depth and atmosphere over brightening them up. Some shades will be dragged down as a result and appear deeper than you might expect – and for shade mixtures without much bright content mixed in, you may observe some masking of dark detail, which could also make the setting undesirable for competitive play. This can be offset to a degree by raising brightness, but that can cause other issues. Under SDR you don’t get the same tone mapping or luminance precision you get under HDR, so you tend to find large areas of medium and bright shade being displayed at high brightness if you ramp up the brightness setting. This can make things appear ‘flooded’ in places and can be somewhat overwhelming or uncomfortable visually. Under HDR such scenes would include isolated bright shades, including well-defined highlights, and superior depth to many of the medium shades. We used this setting on top of our ‘Test Settings’ or with brightness raised as high as ‘50’ depending on room lighting, where we found the setting quite dynamic but comfortable to use. Overall, the amount of ‘haloing’ was impressively minor given the zone count and panel type and the tendency to dark bias certainly helped. But we would’ve liked to have seen a greater number of options available to control the local dimming – or at least a setting with a bit more of a tendency to bright bias for those preferring that. With the setting active, using our preferred ‘Average’ setting, there’s a clear improvement to the depth of darker shades on the screen and more ‘inkiness’ to said shades and indeed many medium shades. Which is sometimes welcome, but not where it can mask detail or make medium-bright shades appear a bit dull. Brighter shades can be given a nice boost in the same scene, particularly with the brightness setting raised a bit. This is especially true for bright scenes where bright shades dominate and dark biasing isn’t influencing things. The monitor can sustain respectable brightness levels with local dimming enabled – similar to with the setting disabled (just shy of 500 nits), but with a definite perceived edge in contrast due to the far superior depth of darker shades at the same time. We could certainly appreciate the benefits of ‘Adaptive Dimming’ for gaming and movies, even if we would’ve liked more flexibility to sway things a little more towards bright biasing rather than heavy dark biasing. On the desktop things are far less dynamic and you’ll often observe large areas of uniform shade next to each other; contrasting elements separated by straight edges and suchlike. With such areas being static and others moving as you scroll or move windows about, the relatively limited precision offered by the 576 dimming zones and the discrepancy between that number and the pixel count of the monitor becomes rather obvious. Some brighter shades were dragged down and some darker shades brightened up somewhat, which can be particularly obvious at the well-defined boundaries between these shades. As noted earlier, the mouse cursor remained bright against medium to medium-dark backgrounds, with a noticeable ‘halo’ around the cursor where the background became brighter. You don’t notice these inconsistencies in such a clear way (if at all for most scenes) when gaming or watching video content but they’re certainly noticeable on the desktop with large static shade blocks. The ‘Low’ setting may be preferred by some on the desktop due its gentler approach to dimming, but many of the inconsistencies remained and it just didn’t have the predictability or uniform appearance we prefer on the desktop. The section of the video review below shows this local dimming solution in action. The monitor uses a Quantum Dot (QD) backlight solution to enhance the gamut, employing blue LEDs layered with red and green Quantum Dots. This creates much larger peaks of green and red light than you’d see on your typical standard gamut monitor. These strong green and red peaks enhance the colour gamut whilst also creating a more balanced and less blue-biased spectral profile, potentially aiding viewing comfort. The colour gamut of the X32 FP is shown as a red triangle below. It was compared with the sRGB (green triangle) and DCI-P3 (blue triangle) reference colour spaces using our ‘Test Settings’, as shown in the first image below. The gamut fully covers sRGB (100%) with significant extension beyond. We recorded 96% DCI-P3 coverage but note that the exact measured gamut can vary depending on measurement instrument and software, with slight inter-unit variation also possible. This undersells the gamut, really, as there is also significant extension beyond DCI-P3 for the green to blue edge and for some red shades. The second image shows the monitor’s colour gamut (red triangle) compared to Adobe RGB (purple triangle). We recorded 100% Adobe RGB coverage with some extension beyond, particularly in the red region. This gamut is very generous, so for standard sRGB content outside of a colour-managed environment there’s significant extra vibrancy and saturation. The monitor offers an sRGB emulation setting, switching ‘Color Space’ to ‘sRGB’ in the ‘Color’ section of the menu. The gamut is clamped close to sRGB and locks off gamma and colour channels, though brightness and ‘Over Drive’ (where available) can be adjusted. ‘Rec. 709’ also offers emulation of the sRGB colour space but targets a higher gamma. Using the ‘sRGB’ setting we recorded just a small amount of under-coverage (98% coverage) with just a sliver of over-extension for the green to blue edge of the gamut – shown in the first image below. To maximise colour accuracy within the sRGB colour space, for colour-managed workflows, full calibration and profiling with a colorimeter or similar device using the full native gamut is recommended. The generous DCI-P3 and Adobe RGB coverage would also make the monitor suitable for work within those wider colour spaces. Calibration using the ‘sRGB’ setting may be preferred for some who wish to work only within the sRGB colour space and gain good appropriate saturation levels outside of colour-aware applications as well. Setting ‘Color Space’ to ‘DCI’ provides emulation of the DCI-P3 colour space (95% coverage) without notable extension beyond, as shown in the second image below. As explored earlier the setting also imparts a warm and fairly strong green tint and targets high gamma (‘2.6’, though we recorded ‘2.7’ average on our unit). The settings are restricted in the same way as when using ‘sRGB’ so you can’t modify the colour channels or gamma in the OSD. You may try the ICC profiles featured in the calibration section which include various corrections including gamut mapping for colour-aware applications, but best results are always obtained by calibrating your own unit with your own hardware. Instead of using this ‘sRGB’ setting and putting up with the associated restrictions, AMD users can activate a flexible sRGB emulation setting via the graphics driver. This is done by opening ‘AMD Software’, clicking ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and clicking on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the ‘Custom Color’ slider to the right is set to ‘Enabled’ and ‘Color Temperature Control’ set to ‘Disabled’. It may appear to be set this way by default, but the native rather than restricted gamut is likely in play. If that’s the case, simply switch the ‘Color Temperature Control’ slider to ‘Enabled’ then back to ‘Disabled’ to leverage the sRGB emulation behaviour. This setting is shown in the image below. The gamut below shows results using our ‘Test Settings’ with this driver tweak applied. The colour gamut now covers 99% sRGB with a bit of extension beyond for some red shades. This driver setting offers fairly good tracking of sRGB and helps to cut down on the colour gamut without profiling, including in applications that aren’t colour managed. And you don’t have to put up with restrictions associated with the monitor’s sRGB emulation setting such as locked colour channels. Whilst Nvidia doesn’t have a similar option in their graphics driver, a third party tool called ‘novideo_srgb’ can be used. This provides a similarly effective GPU-side gamut clamp to the AMD driver option. The resulting gamut was very similar to that shown above with the AMD tweak – this is expected given it uses the same data from the EDID of the monitor. The tool and its usage is covered in our sRGB emulation article. As covered in the article, the tool can also provide DCI-P3 and Adobe RGB emulation. It can remove over-extension in the gamut but can’t add additional coverage, so you won’t quite get full DCI-P3 coverage. The monitor gave a strong level of vibrancy to Battlefield 2042. As with most content you consume under SDR, be that in-game or on the desktop, things are designed around the sRGB colour space. If the gamut of the monitor is untamed and extends beyond that, as it does in this case, extra vibrancy and saturation is introduced beyond what is intended by the creators. With a measured gamut of 96% DCI-P3 and strong Adobe RGB coverage here, there was certainly a large dose of extra saturation and strong vibrancy. Natural woody tones and earthy browns often had a red push, where their red tones were brought out too strongly. This can also affect skin tones, making them appear richer than intended and in some cases a bit too ‘sun-kissed’. The greens of vegetation were also overly bright and in places verged slightly towards neon, with overly strong and eye-catching yellowish greens and some shades simply not looking as muted as they should. Sky blues were also brought out in a rather vivid and lively way – a definite vibrant look overall which some will appreciate. Similar observations were made on Shadow of the Tomb Raider. There was a red push to many brown shades, affecting the neutrality of some earthy shades and wooden tones for example. The skin tones of some characters, including Lara Croft, were too rich – not quite appearing sunburnt, but certainly with stronger than intended reddish and pink overtones. The natural environments showcased some very lush and lively-looking greens – some too lively, though, including some out of place bright and overly yellowish greens. Some areas of sky and water included rather vivid light blues and cyan shades, too. On both titles and more broadly the panel’s strong colour consistency was clear, without the saturation shifts at different sections of the screens observed on other LCD panel types. We made further observations on the TV series Futurama, which features large areas of individual shade and is therefore a rather brutal test for colour consistency. The monitor was free from obvious shifts in saturation here – shifts that were far more minor than VA or TN models though slightly stronger than on some IPS models. The red of Dr Zoidberg, for example, appeared a somewhat darker and less vibrant variant towards the far edges of the screen. There was an impressive range of eye-catching neon shades and strong deep shades as well, including neon greens, highlighter yellows, bright cyans and deep purples. More muted pastel shades appeared varied and more muted than these eye-catching shades, but also less muted than they should look. Some will like the highly vibrant look and strong saturation provided by the native gamut, as described here for various game and video content examples. If not, the more toned down and ‘as the creators intend’ appearance of the ‘sRGB’ setting may suit. The image below shows a printed reference sheet of 24 ‘sRGB’ shades, included as part of the Datacolor SpyderCHECKR 24 package. The screen is displaying reference photographs of this printed sheet, in both the same order as printed (right side) and reverse order (left side). The camera is mounted slightly above centre so that the image is representative of what the eye sees from an ergonomically correct viewing position. This, coupled with the inclusion of a flipped version of the shade sheet, allows both accuracy and colour consistency to be visually assessed. Bracketed numbers in our analysis refer to shades on the printed sheet or right side of the screen if they’re ordered consecutively from top left to bottom right. Note that there is always some disparity between how emissive objects (monitor) and non-emissive objects (printed sheet) appear. The monitor is set to a very low brightness to help minimise this disparity. The representation of shades in this image depends on the camera and your own screen, it’s not designed to show exactly how the shades appear in person. It still helps demonstrate some of the relative differences between the original intended sRGB shade and what the monitor outputs, however. Full profiling and appropriate colour management on the application would provide a tighter match, our intention here is to show what can be expected in a non colour-managed environment. Lagom’s viewing angle tests help explore the idea of colour consistency and viewing angle performance. The following observations were made from a normal viewing position, eyes ~70cm from the screen. The slight shifts noted here are more readily apparent if sitting closer and less apparent if sitting further away. On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern, mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal or vertical bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade. We didn’t observe any static interlace patterns on this model, but we observed dynamic ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ under certain conditions. Fine interlaced vertical lines could be seen during movement or when scanning our eyes across the screen at times. They weren’t readily apparent at higher refresh rates, even with HDR active which made them slightly stronger. With or without HDR active, they were relatively easy to spot at double digit refresh rates. By ~60Hz they were particularly obvious and eye-catching to us, appearing even with slight eye movement for a broad range of content. Not everyone will find them bothersome, even at lower refresh rates, though we feel they’d be difficult not to at least notice at lower refresh rates from a ‘normal’ viewing distance. They’re certainly something to consider if you’re sensitive to them, especially if you’ll frequently be using the screen at lower refresh rates (either static or due to lower frame rates under VRR). A sensitive camera and a utility called SMTT 2.0 was used to analyse the latency of the X32 FP. Over 30 repeat readings were taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 2.20ms (a little over 1/3 of a frame at 160Hz) of input lag. This value is valid with ‘Ultra-Low Latency’ or ‘FreeSync Premium’ enabled (greys out ‘Ultra-Low Latency’ and forces it ‘On’). Similar values were recorded with ‘Adaptive Dimming’ enabled. This figure is influenced by both the element of input lag you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the main element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a very low signal delay which even sensitive users shouldn’t find bothersome. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with VRR technology active in a VRR environment or HDR active in an HDR environment. Our article on responsiveness explores the key factors related to the responsiveness of monitors. Particularly important is the notion of ‘perceived blur’, which is contributed to by both the pixel responses of the monitor and the movement of your eyes as you track motion on the screen. This second factor is the main source of perceived blur on modern monitors, but both factors play an important role. A photography technique called ‘pursuit photography’ is also explored, which uses a moving rather than stationary camera to capture motion in a way that reflects both elements of perceived blur. As opposed to static photos or videos which just reflect the pixel response component. The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the test running at its default speed of 960 pixels per second. This is a good practical speed to take such photographs at and highlights both elements of perceived blur well. The UFOs move across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. All three rows of the test are analysed to highlight a range of pixel transitions. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 120Hz, 144Hz and 160Hz with all three ‘Over Drive’ settings. The two final columns show IPS reference screens, where possible, set to what we consider their optimal response time setting for a given refresh rate. The Gigabyte M32U which is quite fast and provides a well-rounded performance and the ASUS PG32UQX which is rather slow for a modern IPS model. Note that any wavy patterns surrounding some UFOs in the background are slight image retention. We observed a bit of image retention when running this test, particularly at 60Hz, and this is something we’ve seen on various monitors before. It soon disappeared when using monitor normally and wasn’t something we observed forming outside of tests like this. If the monitor is set to a higher refresh rate (120Hz+) and reaches relatively low refresh rates such as 60Hz under VRR, there’s significantly more overshoot using the ‘Normal’ setting than observed here with the monitor set to a static 60Hz refresh rate (regardless of VRR being active or not). This difference can be observed across a broad range of transitions, beyond those used in this particular test. This stronger overshoot is demonstrated in the video review. At 60Hz, above, the UFO appears soft and unfocused without clear internal detailing. This reflects a moderate amount of perceived blur due to eye movement. A little trailing is observed due to some weaknesses in pixel response times or overly aggressive tuning. With the ‘Off’ setting, there’s a touch of light ‘powdery’ trailing behind the UFO for the dark background (top row) and medium background (middle row), but not for the light background (bottom row). The monitor performs quite similarly or slightly better than the reference screens. Using the ‘Normal’ setting reduces the ‘powdery’ trailing but introduces a little overshoot. With just a little ‘halo’ trailing visible for the medium and light backgrounds, slightly lighter than the background shade. This is a bit stronger for some transitions not shown here where even darker shades are involved. The ‘Extreme’ setting provides extremely strong overshoot, with a bright and inky appearance. We consider ‘Off’ or ‘Normal’ optimal here, depending on overshoot sensitivity. Below you can see what things look like with refresh rate doubled to 120Hz. At 120Hz, above, the UFO appears significantly narrower with clearer internal detail. This reflects a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement. To the eye the black lines which separate the segments of the UFO are less blended than they appear in the photos, so segmentation is more distinct. The pixel response requirements for a good performance here are significantly increased. The ‘powdery’ trailing is increased as a result using the ‘Off’ setting. There isn’t an obvious ‘smeary’ appearance to this trailing (or for transitions not shown here, for that matter) and performance is clearly superior to the PG32UQX where the trailing is bolder and extends further back. The ‘Normal’ setting removes most of this and replaces it with overshoot – the acceleration is stronger than at a static 60Hz, so this overshoot is more noticeable. Remember our note about reaching ~60Hz under VRR, however. The overshoot is moderately strong but not extreme, with quite an inky appearance for the medium background and quite bright behind the UFO body for the light background. The M32U reference performs some way between the ‘Off’ and ‘Normal’ settings of the Acer, closer to ‘Off’ but with slightly lower ‘powdery’ trailing. We again consider ‘Off’ or ‘Normal’ optimal, depending on overshoot sensitivity. Below you can see how things look with a slight bump in refresh rate to 144Hz. At 144Hz, above, the UFO appears just a touch narrower with slightly improved definition. Not as significant as the initial boost from 60Hz to 120Hz, as going from 120Hz to 144Hz is just an additional 24Hz. The pixel response requirements for a strong performance are slightly increased as well, with a slight increase in ‘powdery’ trailing for all screens. In particular, note the bold initial section very close to the UFO body. The ‘Off’ setting performs quite similarly to the M32U here, a touch faster for some transitions and a touch slower for others. The PG32UQX again clearly lags behind. The ‘Normal’ setting shows just a touch of ‘powdery’ trailing behind he UFO but replaces most of it with overshoot. The overshoot is weaker than at 120Hz – not really visible at all for the dark background, less bright and sticking closer to the UFO elsewhere. The ‘Extreme’ setting intensifies the overshoot significantly and we found this unattractive and distracting in practice. We again consider ‘Off’ or ‘Normal’ optimal, depending on overshoot sensitivity. Below you can see things with a very slight bump, to 160Hz. At 160Hz, above, the UFO appears slightly narrower with somewhat improved definition. To the eye the segmentation is quite distinct now, though the white notches still appear quite blended as they appear in the photos. This reflects a further slight reduction in perceived blur to eye movement. The pixel response requirements are again slightly increased – an extra 16Hz so not a massive one, however. Overall trailing characteristics are similar to at 144Hz, with a very slightly bolder initial section to some of the ‘powdery’ trailing. The overshoot using the ‘Normal’ setting is weakened a bit – it’s a bit more noticeable for some transitions not shown here, but explored subjectively later. The ‘Extreme’ setting is again useless in practice due to extremely strong and obvious overshoot. So we again consider ‘Off’ or ‘Normal’ optimal, depending on overshoot sensitivity. On various Battlefield titles, at a frame rate keeping up with the 160Hz refresh rate, the monitor provided good fluidity. Compared to a 60Hz monitor or this monitor running at 60Hz (or 60fps), the monitor outputs up to 2.67 times as much visual information every second. There are two key advantages to this, the first of which is an improvement to ‘connected feel’. This describes the precision and fluidity you feel when interacting with the game world and is something also aided by the impressively low input lag of this screen. The combination of high refresh rate and frame rate also reduces perceived blur due to eye movement, demonstrated with the pursuit photos earlier. These advantages provide a competitive edge in games like Battlefield and can simply make for a visually more comfortable experience – especially if coupled with rapid pixel responses. And rapid pixel responses were provided in many cases on this model, so it was able to provide a convincing 160Hz experience. In most cases weaknesses were minor, just a small whiff of ‘powdery’ trailing in places which adds just a small touch of perceived blur. The most significant weaknesses being where very bright or highly saturated shades are set against significantly darker backgrounds. There you can see slightly more distinct ‘powdery’ trailing that adds a bit more perceived blur, but these weaknesses are still relatively minor and very different to and less eye-catching than the weaknesses observed for similar transitions on the PG32UQX or even some of the weaknesses observed on the Neo G7 which is generally regarded as quite a competent performer. Moderate overshoot can be observed for some transitions, including black against a light background – stronger for light grey or very light pastel shades in the background than white. It appears as bright cyan ‘halo’ trailing with other bright shades present depending on the background shade. A dark tree trunk against a dusk sky would be a good in-game example of where this might be observed. We also noticed some ‘dirty’ trailing in places, where some relatively bright shades were set against a medium-dark background (such as a street light against a cloudy sky). This trailing appeared somewhat darker than the background shade. This wasn’t extreme overshoot by any means, but it will be bothersome to some people. Perceived overshoot is eliminated with overdrive set to ‘Off’. As explored with Test UFO earlier and reinforced over a broader range of transitions, ‘Off’ still provides quite a respectable response performance without clear standout weaknesses. So this may suit some who prefer a bit of an increase in ‘powdery’ trailing and overall perceived blur to overshoot. We made similar observations on Shadow of the Tomb Raider, again with a convincing 160Hz experience and some minor weaknesses. This title has many ‘high contrast’ scenes which can highlight some of the slight weaknesses on this model, but the same scenes would also highlight more significant weaknesses on slower IPS models (Iike the PG32UQX) and reveal ‘smeary’ trailing on most VA models. The weaknesses here were far more minor – a bit of ‘powdery trailing’ and some overshoot in places, moderate for some transitions but nothing extreme. We also observed video content at a range of refresh rates, including ~24 – 30fps content on platforms such as Netflix and 60fps content on YouTube. The weaknesses were very much on the minor side, mainly in the form of slight overshoot in places – you could again set the overdrive to ‘Off’ to eliminate this whilst slightly increasing ‘powdery’ trailing. Though even with the ‘Off’ setting the monitor provides a competent experience here, with these relatively low frame rates being less demanding in terms of pixel response requirements. The main barrier to fluidity was the frame rate of the content itself rather than weaknesses related to the pixel responses of the monitor. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work. AMD FreeSync is a variable refresh rate technology, an AMD-specific alternative to Nvidia G-SYNC. Where possible, the monitor dynamically adjusts its refresh rate so that it matches the frame rate being outputted by the GPU. Both our responsiveness article and the G-SYNC article linked to explore the importance of these two elements being synchronised. At a basic level, a mismatch between the frame rate and refresh rate can cause stuttering (VSync on) or tearing and juddering (VSync off). FreeSync also boasts reduced latency compared to running with VSync enabled, in the variable frame rate environment in which it operates. FreeSync requires a compatible AMD GPU such as the Radeon RX 580 used in our test system. The monitor itself must support ‘VESA Adaptive-Sync’ for at least one of its display connectors, as this is the protocol that FreeSync uses. The Predator X32 FP supports FreeSync Premium Pro via DP and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. Note that HDR can be activated at the same time as FreeSync and ‘Adaptive Dimming’ can be used. You need to make sure ‘FreeSync Premium Pro’ is enabled in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD. You should also ensure the GPU driver is setup correctly to use FreeSync – so open ‘AMD Software’, click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the first slider is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below. The top image shows the monitor connected by DP and the bottom image by HDMI. The setting is referred to as ‘AMD FreeSync Premium Pro’ in both cases, although the exact wording may depend on the driver version you’re using. To configure VSync, open ‘AMD Software’. Click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click ‘Graphics’. The setting is listed as ‘Wait for Vertical Refresh’. This configures it globally, but if you wish to configure it for individual games click ‘Game Graphics’ towards the top right. The default is ‘Off, unless application specifies’ which means that VSync will only be active if you enable it within the game itself, if there is such an option. Such an option does usually exist – it may be called ‘sync every frame’ or something along those lines rather than simply ‘VSync’. Most users will probably wish to enable VSync when using FreeSync to ensure that they don’t get any tearing. You’d therefore select either the third or fourth option in the list, shown in the image below. Above this dropdown list there’s a toggle for ‘Radeon Enhanced Sync’. This is an alternative to VSync which allows the frame rate to rise above the refresh rate (no VSync latency penalty) whilst potentially keeping the experience free from tearing or juddering. This requires that the frame rate comfortably exceeds the refresh rate, not just peaks slightly above it. We won’t be going into this in detail as it’s a GPU feature rather than a monitor feature. As usual we tested a range of game titles using AMD FreeSync and found the experience similar across all of them. Any issues which affect one title but not others would suggest a GPU driver issue or game issue rather than a monitor issue. For simplicity, we’ll just focus on Battlefield titles for this section. The full VRR range of the monitor can be tested with these titles using our Radeon RX 580. This isn’t a very powerful GPU so it was extremely common to see dips below 160fps using the native resolution of the screen. Without VRR technology in use, these dips would be accompanied by tearing (VSync off) or stuttering (VSync on) from frame and refresh rate mismatches. FreeSync removed these mismatches, which is a definite bonus if you’re sensitive to such things. A reduction in frame rate remains a reduction in frame rate, though, so ‘connected feel’ and perceived blur are still negatively impacted just as they would be without VRR active. The monitor doesn’t employ variable overdrive, which would re-tune the pixel responses to prevent increased overshoot levels as refresh rate drops. If you stick with the ‘Normal’ setting, overshoot becomes quite strong by ~120Hz and increases further below that. It’s mainly observed as ‘halo’ trailing around some darker objects with certain medium-bright shades in the background, which became more noticeable at decreased refresh rates. By ~60Hz it was rather eye-catching and difficult to ignore – potentially quite annoying where affected transitions are present, which isn’t uncommon in darker scenes or potentially for shadowy areas or darker objects in brighter scenes. If you find this bothersome or you’re frequently finding your frame rates dipping well below the maximum supported by the monitor with VRR active (particularly ~120fps or into the double digits), you can instead set ‘Overdrive’ to ‘Off’. As explored earlier this still provides a competent performance, with a bit of extra ‘powdery’ trailing and perceived blur that’s particularly minor anywhere near or below 60Hz. Importantly, it eliminates perceivable overshoot at any refresh rate. FreeSync worked down to the floor of operation (usually ~55Hz or slightly lower), below which LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) kicks in. This keeps the refresh rate at a multiple of the frame rate to keep tearing and stuttering at bay. There was a subtle momentary stuttering when LFC activated or deactivated, something we always observe and not specific to this model. It was much less noticeable than traditional stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches, but if you’re sensitive to it and frequently passing the boundary it could be annoying. As noted earlier, AMD FreeSync makes use of Adaptive-Sync technology on a compatible monitor. As of driver version 417.71, users with Nvidia GPUs (GTX 10 series and newer) and Windows 10 or later can also make use of this Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology. When a monitor is used in this way, it is something which Nvidia refers to as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’. Some models are validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass certain quality checks. With the Acer Predator X32 FP you can connect the monitor up via either DisplayPort or HDMI 2.1 to use ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’, with the latter technically making use of HDMI 2.1’s integrated VRR functionality rather than Adaptive-Sync. You need to make sure ‘FreeSync Premium Pro’ is switched on in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD to use the technology via DP as this toggles Adaptive-Sync. When you open up Nvidia Control Panel, you should then see ‘Set up G-SYNC’ listed in the ‘Display’ section. Ensure the ‘Enable G-SYNC, G-SYNC Compatible’ checkbox and ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is checked as shown below and press ‘OK’. If you’ve enabled ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and it was previously disabled, the monitor should re-establish its connection with the system and the technology should now be active. HDMI 2.1 includes Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) support as part of the specification. This is an integrated technology, which unlike FreeSync does not rely on VESA Adaptive-Sync to function. As such it be used by devices such as the PS5 that don’t support Adaptive-Sync. It can also be leveraged via ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ on compatible Nvidia GPUs. Based on our testing of ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ using HDMI 2.1 VRR, the experience was very similar to the Adaptive-Sync experience under SDR and HDR. HDR (High Dynamic Range) on an ideal monitor involves very deep dark shades displayed at the same time as very bright light shades. As well as a broad spectrum of shades between these extremes, including muted pastel shades and highly vibrant saturated shades. Ideally, per-pixel illumination would be offered (e.g. self-emissive displays such as OLED), or for LCDs a very large number of precisely controlled dimming zones used. A solution such as FALD (Full Array Local Dimming) with a generous number of dimming zones, for example. Such a solution would allow some areas of the screen to remain very dim whilst others show brilliantly high brightness. Colour reproduction is also an important part of HDR, with the ultimate goal being support for a huge colour gamut, Rec. 2020. A more achievable near-term goal is support for at least 90% DCI-P3 (Digital Cinema Initiatives standard colour space) coverage. Finally, HDR makes use of at least 10-bit precision per colour channel, so its desirable that the monitor supports at least 10-bits per subpixel. HDR10 is the most widely supported standard used in HDR games and movies and what is supported here. For games and other full screen applications that support HDR, the Acer X32 FP (as of firmware 2.00.015) automatically switches to its HDR operating mode if an HDR signal is provided and ‘HDR’ is set to ‘Auto’ in the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD. Some game titles will activate HDR correctly when the appropriate in-game setting is selected. Others that support HDR will only run in HDR if ‘Use HDR’ is turned on in Windows, too. Related Windows HDR settings are found in the ‘Windows HD Color settings’ (Windows 10) or ‘HDR’ (Windows 11) section of ‘Display settings’ (right click the desktop). If you want to view HDR movie content, ensure ‘Stream HDR Video’ (Windows 10) or ‘Play streaming HDR video’ (Windows 11) is active. Also note that there’s an ‘HDR/SDR brightness balance’ (Windows 10) or ‘SDR content brightness’ (Windows 11) slider that allows you to adjust the overall balance of SDR content if HDR is active in Windows. This is really just a digital brightness slider that only makes changes for SDR content, and you lose contrast by adjusting it. Image balance is upset when viewing SDR content under HDR, as if gamma is quite a bit too low overall which gives a rather foggy look and reveals a fair bit of unintended detail – colour accuracy also suffers. As usual. we’d recommend only activating HDR in Windows if you’re about to use an HDR application that specifically requires it. For simplicity we’ll primarily focus on Shadow of the Tomb Raider in this section, though a range of other titles were also tested. This is a game we’ve tested extensively on a broad range of monitors under HDR and we know it offers a good HDR experience on capable monitors and is a suitable test for such capability. Although our testing focuses on HDR PC gaming using DisplayPort on an RTX 3090, similar observations were made when viewing HDR video content on the Netflix app. As with games, some HDR video content makes better use of HDR than others. There are some additional points to bear in mind if you wish to view such content. We made similar observations using HDMI, which would be used when viewing HDR content on an HDR compatible games console for example*. Testing on both our Nvidia and AMD GPUs revealed a similar HDR implementation on both GPUs, unless ‘AMD FreeSync Premium Pro’ was active on the AMD GPU. With this active the screen dark biased far less and we encountered significantly elevated (lightened up) dark shades and even some medium shades appearing significantly brighter than intended, without suitable depth. The relatively limited number of dimming zones was far more apparent because of this behaviour. The depth of pure black as measured using the HDR brightness test earlier was raised significantly, to ~0.70 cd/m² or higher – this isn’t how things should look at all. Even SDR content (the desktop) changed significantly when activating and deactivating ‘AMD FreeSync Premium Pro’ in the graphics driver. We’re not sure how much of this was down to our outdated AMD GPU (RX 580), which doesn’t support DSC and can’t make full use of the monitor. Limiting the refresh rate to 60Hz and enabling or disabling DSC in the OSD of the monitor didn’t change our observations here and they were similar using both DP and HDMI. With the firmware version we tested, we were able to adjust the colour channels and brightness. Settings such as gamma and contrast were locked off. Adjusting colour channels can be useful if you notice a particular tint or bias, but the white point and overall colour channel balance is different under SDR and HDR – and as we noted earlier, colour channel adjustments are universal. So any changes made under SDR carry over to HDR and vice versa. Fortunately, the setup was pretty decent on our unit with ‘Color Temperature’ set to ‘Warm’ under HDR, giving a white point ~6800K (can vary depending on brightness and shades on the screen) and reasonable green channel balance. Although you can reduce brightness from the default of ‘100’ if you wish, this negatively impacts the PQ curve of the monitor. So rather than things being correctly mapped and the peak brightness simply being limited, you gain a duller look to the image with many shades appearing washed out (as if gamma is too low under SDR). The effect is gentler with slight adjustments than on some monitors, though, and it can be useful to reduce brightness if you find the screen uncomfortably bright under HDR. A key setting under HDR is ‘Adaptive Dimming’, found in the ‘Gaming’ Section of the OSD. The three settings available (‘Low’, ‘Average’ and ‘Fast’) were explored with respect to SDR earlier and they offer similar behaviour under HDR. ‘Low’ offers the most aggressive dark-biasing and under HDR that includes for ‘high contrast’ shade mixtures, as demonstrated in the contrast table earlier. We felt it was a bit too gentle and slow to react when gaming to provide as much of a dynamic experience as we’d like. ‘Fast’ was too aggressive where small bright areas were surrounded by medium and medium-dark shades, meaning ‘halos’ were more widespread with an accompanying ‘flickering’ due to the rapid dimming and brightening of zones. If you’re particularly sensitive to that then the ‘Low’ setting is certainly worth checking out, but we didn’t find this too bothersome using ‘Average’ and preferred the setting otherwise and felt that it struck the best balance overall. As noted when covering our ‘Test Settings’ earlier, we used ‘Adaptive-Dimming = Average’ for our testing here with colour temperature left at ‘Warm’, brightness at ‘100’ and ‘Super Sharpness’ disabled. Remember that the ‘Adaptive-Dimming’ setting applies universally so you can’t have a different setting for SDR and HDR. The Acer X32 FP is VESA DisplayHDR 1000 certified. This is the second highest level of certification that VESA offers for LCDs. Focusing first on the colour gamut, this certification level requires a minimum 95% DCI-P3 coverage. In this case the QD LEDs of the backlight provided 96% DCI-P3 with a fair bit of extension beyond DCI-P3 in the green to blue region – meaning a bit more encroachment onto Rec. 2020 than pure DCI-P3 would provide, but by no means full or near full Rec. 2020 coverage. The gamut is shown in the representation below, where the red triangle shows the monitor’s colour gamut, the blue triangle DCI-P3 and green triangle sRGB. The monitor also supports 10-bit colour, which can be used efficiently for HDR10 content like this to facilitate the enhanced luminance and shade mapping precision expected under HDR. This improves the nuanced shade variety, helping the monitor put its gamut to good use but also bringing out some extra dark detail. This gives a natural uplift of dark detail, which is very different to the ‘flooded’ or artificially raised look a gamma enhancement would achieve under SDR. It also helped provide more natural shade progressions and smoother progressions for bright shades, such as weather effects, smoke effects and some particle effects. These smoother gradients are more noticeable on some titles and even some scenes than others. The image below shows one of our favourite scenes from Shadow of the Tomb Raider for HDR. Remember that the photo is purely for illustrative purposes and in no way represents how the monitor appeared running HDR in person. In this scene the monitor provided a good level of brightness for the brighter elements, such as the sunlight streaming in from above and the glint of light on the water surface. The 10-bit colour reproduction provided a relatively smooth look to the rays of light and mist around the waterfall as well, whilst the shaded areas to the left had quite a deep look to the shadows and daker patches of vegetation. Due to heavy dark biasing, as we explored earlier in the ‘Contrast and brightness’ section, some of the medium shades here were a fair bit darker than they’d ideally be. If they were lifted up to appropriate depth, that would’ve negatively impacted the darker shadow details – so it’s a compromise due to the relatively limited number of dimming zones spread across a large IPS screen. HDR content naturally tends to include some very impressive shade depth with smaller bright highlights – and you can’t have everything ‘uplifted’ by raising brightness (as you do under SDR). This dulling was observed quite generally where mixtures of medium to medium-dark shades dominate, for example a duller daylight scene with overcast skies. The dragging down of some shades effectively masks some detail – not a complete loss of detail (like ‘black crush’ or similar), but a dimmer and duller than intended look in places. The dark biasing also affects the brightness peaks and bright highlights as the monitor won’t make them quite as bright as it could if they’re surrounded by shades which are sufficiently dark in comparison. The glint in the scene shown above peaked as high as 691 nits with the dark-biasing holding things back a bit. So these bright aspects of the scene weren’t as spectacular as we’ve seen from some Mini LED offerings, but still had good ‘pop’. ‘Blooming’ or ‘halos’ are not eliminated by the dark-biasing and can still be observed in places, particularly for bright elements against darker backgrounds (including HUD elements and menu items etc.) But they’re certainly reduced because of it and the general depth of large areas of dark shades was significantly improved by the local dimming solution. This dark biasing was also quite strong on the Odyssey Neo G7, but not to this degree – the Samsung has around twice the dimming zone density to play with and a VA panel with strong native contrast, though. Another comparison with the Samsung can be made in scenes where bright shades dominate. Here, the Acer had a definite edge as it was able to reach luminance levels as high as or at least closer to its absolute peak. Whereas the Samsung was held back by a power delivery limitation for the backlight – the graphs earlier highlighted this behaviour well. This sort of limitation is also observed on OLED models, so it’s nice to see the Acer is free from that. Overall, we found the HDR experience here a lot more compelling than what most LCDs provide. The dimming zone precision is certainly relatively limited given the size of the screen, but is sufficient to provide good depth and atmosphere and some nice bright highlights. It’s vastly better than any edge-lit dimming solution would provide and it felt a bit like a cut-down version of what you’d see on the ASUS PG32UQX or ViewSonic XG321UQ with their impressively powerful 1152-zone Mini LED backlights (and willingness to bright bias more). We feel some improvements could be made with the available hardware, however. We would’ve preferred to see more flexibility with the local dimming settings or at least less widespread and aggressive (i.e. more selective) dark biasing to help give some medium and brighter shades an appropriate uplift. And perhaps gentler dimming behaviour and some blending where smaller bright objects are surrounded by somewhat darker shades. That could reduce halos and a potential ‘flickering’ effect there as the zones currently transition rapidly from their dimmer to brighter state and back during movement in the scene. The colour gamut is also very generous and things certainly looked quite vibrant in places under HDR. But the monitor still didn’t seem to be put its generous gamut to full use under HDR – we’re not expecting oversaturation, but there was still room for some more saturation where appropriate. The strong dark biasing didn’t help in this respect, but even where bright shades dominated the colour gamut wasn’t always put to full use. The section of video review below runs through the HDR experience using various scenes in Shadow of the Tomb Raider with some Battlefield V on the side for a bit of variety. Our article on the 3840 x 2160 ‘4K’ UHD experience explores the resolution on a 28” screen, with a pixel density of 157.35 PPI (Pixels Per Inch). The 32” screen of the Acer has a slightly lower pixel density at 137.68 PPI, but this is still high for a monitor. There’s a definite crisp and clear look to text and a clarity to suitably high resolution content that simply isn’t delivered from a significantly lower pixel density and is similar to what’s described in the article. The 32” screen provides more flexibility with respect to using the monitor without as much scaling or application-specific zoom. We were happy to use the monitor without any scaling, which provided excellent ‘desktop real estate’ and multi-tasking potential. But if you do like to use scaling you’d opt for a lower level of this than with a smaller ‘4K’ UHD screen and can maintain more of that ‘desktop real estate’. As explored in the experience article, you still benefit from the high pixel density even if you use scaling or application-specific zoom, provided the text scales ‘cleanly’ (which it does in most cases, on modern versions of Windows). The images below show the screen in action on the desktop and doing some multi-tasking natively (100% scaling – no scaling) and with a small amount of scaling applied (125%). Note that these images are just for illustrative purposes and don’t accurately reflect how the monitor appears in person. Any banding and patchiness on solid backgrounds are artifacts in the image, not observed in person. The 3840 x 2160 (‘4K’ UHD) resolution is graphically demanding, so it may be desirable to run certain games or applications at a lower resolution for performance reasons. Or this may be essential due to the use of a system such as games console that doesn’t support a ‘4K’ UHD signal. The monitor can use interpolation (scaling) to map lower resolutions such as 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p) and 2560 x 1440 (QHD or 1440p) onto all 3840 x 2160 pixels of the display – the monitor does not support scaling for 2560 x 1440 @120Hz, so will not accept a 120Hz QHD signal. To ensure the monitor rather than GPU is handling the scaling process, as a PC user, you need to ensure the GPU driver is correctly configured so that the GPU doesn’t take over the scaling process. For AMD GPU users the monitor will handle the scaling by default, when gaming at non-native resolutions. Nvidia users should open the Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. They should ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown below. As usual, if you’re running the monitor at 3840 x 2160 and viewing 1920 x 1080 content (for example a video over the internet or a Blu-ray, using movie software) then it is the GPU and software that handles the upscaling. That’s got nothing to do with the monitor itself – there is a very small amount of softening to the image compared to viewing such content on a native Full HD monitor, but it’s slight and shouldn’t bother most users. The video below shows the monitor in action. The camera, processing done and your own screen all affect the output – so it doesn’t accurately represent what you’d see when viewing the monitor in person. It still provides useful visual demonstrations and explanations which help reinforce some of the key points raised in the written piece. The ‘4K’ UHD resolution spread across a ~32” screen size provided an immersive and pixel-rich experience that can be very enjoyable for both work and play. With an excellent amount of ‘desktop real-estate’ and strong clarity. This was provided by the Acer Predator X32 FP, with a host of additional attractive features. The styling of the monitor is typical for a model in the series, with quite a solid and premium feel aided by a weighty coated metal stand and firm attachment of stand to screen. Good ergonomics are also provided, with only pivot adjustment lacking, and a generous 4 HDMI 2.1 ports are included alongside USB-C with 90W PD. The former will keep console gamers happy and allows ‘4K’ @120Hz output for devices such as the PS5 and Xbox Series X. The latter can appeal to those with a laptop, with KVM functionality assisting with easy USB peripheral sharing. The native contrast performance was largely as expected for the panel, though ‘IPS glow’ was subdued enough for us to consider this a ‘low glow’ panel. It was still there and it still ate away at detail and atmosphere for darker scenes (when observed in dimmer lighting) – plus it’s a bit more colourful than usual. But it’s also less bright and in our view less eye-catching than the brighter ‘IPS glow’ typically observed. A key feature of the monitor is its AmLED panel’s 576 local dimming zones, which provided a dynamic experience for SDR using the ‘Adaptive Dimming’ setting. It tends to dark bias strongly, dragging some shades down, but also maintains strong depth and atmosphere with some good bursts of brightness at the same time. Under HDR this solution was put to good use in an even more dynamic fashion, with significantly improved brightness peaks and superior tone mapping and luminance precision. Dark biasing was again a notable ‘feature’ and not one that can be adjusted in the OSD – even using the most reactive ‘Fast’ setting, which also created noticeable flickering during rapid zone transitions in some scenes. Despite this and even using the more toned down ‘Average’ or even ‘Low’ setting, the monitor provided a far richer and livelier HDR experience than most LCDs. And the bright scene performance where bright shades dominate was impressive, without the brightness being constrained by the power limitations associated with OLEDs and some Mini LED models. The colour reproduction was also strong, with pleasing consistency from the IPS-type panel and very high vibrancy due to the very generous colour gamut. With full Adobe RGB and sRGB coverage plus strong DCI-P3 coverage, the monitor has good potential for colour critical uses as well. Under HDR vibrancy was a shade under what we’d expect from such a generous gamut, but still good – particularly in bright scenes where dark biasing was less of an issue. The monitor also ticked some important boxes when it came to responsiveness, with very low input lag, diverse VRR support and strong pixel responsiveness. There were only minor weaknesses in terms of ‘powdery trailing’ using the ‘Normal’ overdrive setting, though there was moderate overshoot that became quite strong in places as frame rate (and hence refresh rate) dropped significantly under VRR. Fortunately, the ‘Off’ setting provided an overshoot-free experience with a decent level of pixel responsiveness – the ‘Over Drive’ control was initially locked off with Adaptive-Sync active, but a firmware update unlocked this. Alongside the addition of automatic HDR activation and deactivation according to the signal, this was a really positive change with the new firmware and good to see. We would’ve been even happier if the ‘Adaptive Dimming’ setting was remembered separately for SDR and HDR, however. A comparison that comes to mind when using and discussing this monitor is with the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7. That model has a contrast advantage due to its VA panel and it has around twice as many dimming zones. With its more limited number of dimming zones and IPS-type panel, the Acer has to be more aggressive with its dark biasing to maintain good depth and atmosphere and avoid clear ‘haloing’, which drags medium to brighter shades down in some cases more than on the Samsung. Whilst the aggressive curve of the Samsung will appeal to some, it is a deal-breaker for others – we feel it’s misplaced on a 16:9 screen. The Acer is also able to sustain higher brightness where bright shades dominate under HDR (superior bright scene performance), it has a superior colour gamut and consistency for extra vibrancy and a lighter matte screen surface which complements that well. The Samsung also has some isolated issues with response times that are significantly slower than the Acer. Really the Acer can be thought of as a cut down version of the ASUS PG32UQX and ViewSonic XG321UG, with half as many dimming zones, more limited brightness output and no G-SYNC module with variable overdrive. But superior pixel responsiveness more suited to the 144Hz+ refresh rate and a significantly lower price tag. Whilst the Acer may have its quirks, it’s a truly unique monitor at time of review which is suitable for a wide range of uses. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.
*10-bit and 12-bit can be selected in the graphics driver at any refresh rate, up to the native resolution using DP 1.4 (with DSC) or HDMI 2.1 under SDR or HDR. 12-bit includes an additional dithering stage applied by the monitor’s scaler to facilitate viewing higher bit depth content. The bit depths listed here are using a Full Range RGB signal.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.
Features and aesthetics
The screen is moderately thick – 35mm (1.38 inches) at thinnest point with more central bulk towards the stand attachment point. The stand offers tilt (5° forwards, 35° backwards), swivel (30° left, 30° right), and height adjustment (130mm or 5.12 inches). These adjustments felt quite smooth overall, with the exception of the tilt adjustment which was slightly stiff but still ‘free’ enough that it didn’t feel as if you were breaking the screen by tilting it. At lowest stand height the bottom of the screen sits ~77mm (3.03 inches) above the desk with the top of the screen ~508mm (20.00 inches) above the desk. The total depth of the monitor including stand is ~310mm (12.20 inches) with the centre of the screen ~50mm (1.97 inches) from the frontmost point of the stand. The stand is therefore quite deep (and large in general), so check your desk depth for practicality. At the left side, as viewed from the front, there are 2 USB 3.0 ports.
The rear of the monitor is dominated by dark matte plastic, with some vents arranged in ‘chevrons’ towards the sides and above the stand attachment point. A clip-on headphone hook is included, which fits at the top of the stand neck if used. Further down, a rectangular cable-tidy loop is included which forms part of the height adjustment mechanism. The stand attaches centrally and can be unscrewed after removing a plastic cover to facilitate alternative mounting via 100 x 100mm VESA. The remaining ports face downwards and include; DC power input (external ‘power brick’), 3.5mm headphone jack, 4 HDMI 2.1 ports, DP 1.4 (with DSC), USB-C (90W PD, DP Alt Mode, upstream data) and 2 further USB 3.0 ports plus Type-B upstream. 2 x 7W down-firing speakers are included, which produce reasonably rich sound output with decent volume. You’re also able to set the speakers to good low volumes for quiet-room listening. The sound is less tinny than some monitor speakers, but is far from the clearest or bass-rich sound output we’ve heard from a monitor. They won’t replace a decent set of standalone speakers or headphones, though they can be useful to have as a backup or for basic sound reproduction purposes. Standard accessories include; a power cable and adaptor, DP cable, Ultra High Speed HDMI cable, USB-C cable and USB cable (A-B) but may vary regionally.
3840 x 2160 @160Hz plus HDR and Adaptive-Sync can be leveraged via DP 1.4 (with DSC) and HDMI 2.1. AMD FreeSync Premium Pro and Nvidia’s ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ is supported on compatible GPUs and systems via suitable versions of DP and HDMI. Compatible Intel graphics hardware can also leverage Adaptive-Sync. HDMI 2.1 includes integrated VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) capability which doesn’t rely on Adaptive-Sync and can be used via ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and the PS5 which doesn’t support Adaptive-Sync. With HDMI 2.1, games consoles like the Xbox Series X and PS5 are able to run 3840 x 2160 @120Hz. The HDMI 2.1 ports of this model offer full bandwidth (48Gbps), which means the PS5 can use its maximum supported ‘4:2:2’ signal for ‘4K’ UHD @120Hz, with PCs and the Xbox Series X using their fully supported Full Range or ‘4:4:4’ signal.
The image below shows the refresh rates listed for the 2560 x 1440 (QHD or 1440p) resolution, with the same options available via DP and HDMI. As explored in the ‘Interpolation and upscaling’ section the monitor does not provide scaling capability for the 2560 x 1440 (QHD) resolution at 120Hz, so it will not accept a ‘1440p 120Hz’ signal.
The images below show the refresh rates supported for 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p). The first image shows the ‘TV’ resolution list with the same options available via DP and HDMI. The second image shows the ‘PC’ resolution list (144Hz) which is only available via HDMI.
If you’re intending to use the monitor with the PS5 or Xbox Series X/S, be aware that a small settings tweak may be required to ensure 120Hz is selectable for supported resolutions. Details can be found in this article.
Calibration
Subpixel layout and screen surface
As shown above the standard RGB (Red, Green and Blue) stripe subpixel layout is used. This is the default expected by modern operating systems such as Microsoft Windows. Apple’s MacOS no longer uses subpixel rendering and therefore doesn’t optimise text for one particular subpixel layout to the detriment of another. You needn’t worry about text fringing from non-standard subpixel layouts and won’t need to change the defaults in the ‘ClearType Text Tuner’ as a Windows user. You may still wish to run through the ClearType wizard and adjust according to preferences, however. The subpixels are slightly ‘squat’ with slightly larger gaps above and below than some models will show. In some cases this contributes to ‘static interlace pattern artifacts’ and can affect text and fine-edge clarity. On this model we observed no such issues, likely as the pixel density is so high that the gaps above and below the subpixels are still tiny. We therefore had no subpixel-related concerns related to sharpness or text clarity on this model.
Testing the presets
Preset Mode Gamma (central average) White point (kelvins) Notes Gamma = 1.8 1.8 6418K Some very vibrant elements, but a lack of depth to many shades due to gamma handling. A bit of a warm tint to the image. Gamma = 2.0 2.0 6416K As above, slightly improved depth. Gamma = 2.2 (Factory Defaults) 2.2 6430K As above with improved depth and ‘2.2’ gamma tracking. A highly vibrant look overall. Gamma = 2.4 2.5 6415K As above, more depth due to higher gamma. Gamma = 2.6 2.7 6420K As above with even more depth – a rather ‘contrasty’ look with significant crushing of dark detail. Color Temp. = User 2.2 6394K Similar to factory defaults but slightly warmer tone. Color Space = sRGB 2.2 6414K An sRGB emulation setting, clamping the gamut close to sRGB to constrain saturation. A mild green push but not extreme, quite a well-balanced sRGB emulation mode. Brightness can be adjusted. Color Space = DCI 2.7 6265K A DCI-P3 emulation mode, clamping the gamut close to DCI and applying locked high gamma plus imparting quite a strong green tint. Brightness can be adjusted. Low Blue Light = Level 4 2.2 4785K An effective Low Blue Light (LBL) setting, providing a warm and moderately green-tinted look to the image. The blue channel and hence blue light output is significantly reduced – most effective when brightness is also reduced. Test Settings 2.2 6491K Highly vibrant with good white point and colour channel balance.
Gamma 'Test Settings'
Test Settings
Contrast and brightness
Contrast ratios
Monitor Settings White luminance (cd/m²) Black luminance (cd/m²) Contrast ratio (x:1) 100% brightness 484 0.41 1180 80% brightness (Factory Default for ‘Standard’) 387 0.33 1173 60% brightness 288 0.24 1200 40% brightness 194 0.16 1213 20% brightness 95 0.08 1188 0% brightness 4 <0.01 >400 100% brightness (Max Brightness = Off) 61 0.05 1220 0% brightness (Max Brightness = Off) 4 <0.01 >400 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (1% white, peak)* 550 / 574 / 657 <0.03 / <0.03 / <0.03 18333 / 19133 / 21900 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (4% white, peak)* 842 / 857 / 882 0.04 / 0.04 / 0.04 21050 / 21425 / 22050 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (9% white, peak)* 984 / 988 / 1002 0.05 / 0.05 / 0.05 19680 / 19760 / 20040 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (25% white, peak)* 1002 / 1139 /1139 0.08 / 0.09 / 0.09 12525 / 12656 / 12656 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (49% white, peak)* 1132 / 1142 / 1142 0.14 / 0.14 / 0.14 8086 / 8157 / 8157 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast (100% white, sustained)** 1041 / 1041/ 1041 N/A N/A HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Off (1% white, peak)* 546 0.55 993 HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Off (100% white, sustained)** 547 N/A N/A HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Average, Game Scene 1 (SOTTR water glint)*** 691 N/A N/A HDR, Adaptive Dimming = Average, Game Scene 2 (BFV mountain sun)*** 773 N/A N/A Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 0% brightness (1% white, peak)**** 2 / 2 / 2 <0.01 / <0.01 / <0.01 >200 / >200 / >200 Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 50% brightness (1% white, peak)**** 122 / 122 / 138 <0.01 / <0.01 / <0.01 >12200 / >12200 / >13800 Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 100% brightness (1% white, peak)**** 243 / 243 / 274 0.03 / <0.01 / <0.01 8100 / >24300 / >27400 Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 0% brightness (100% white, sustained)**** 4 / 4 / 4 N/A N/A Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 50% brightness (100% white, sustained)**** 239 / 239 / 239 N/A N/A Adaptive Dimming = Low / Average / Fast, 100% brightness (100% white, sustained)**** 473 / 473 / 473 N/A N/A Gamma = 1.8 386 0.33 1170 Gamma = 2.0 386 0.33 1170 Gamma = 2.4 386 0.33 1170 Gamma = 2.6 385 0.33 1167 Color Temp. = User 487 0.41 1188 Color Space = sRGB 142 0.13 1092 Color Space = sRGB (100% brightness) 478 0.42 1138 Color Space = DCI 324 0.29 1117 Low Blue Light = Level 4 259 0.25 1036 Test Settings 166 0.15 1107
*HDR measurements were made using this YouTube HDR brightness test video, running full screen at ‘2160p 4K HDR’ on Microsoft Edge. The maximum reading using the patch size (measurement area) specified in the table was used. The black luminance was taken at the same point of the video with the colorimeter offset to the side of the white test patch, equidistant between the test patch and edge of the monitor bezel.
In the graph you can see that the monitor is relatively ‘cautious’ about its brightness levels, reaching its peak at a 49% white patch and coming close to or slightly exceeding 1000 cd/m² at a 9% white patch. In the ‘real world’, this means scenes where there are large patches of bright shade. This gentle ramp up in peak brightness reflects heavy dark biasing from the algorithm of the monitor. Dark biasing reduces ‘halos’ or ‘blooming’, terms which can be used interchangeably in this context. This is when zones brighten up a lot even though they’re partly occupied by darker shades, brightening that darker area up significantly more than adjacent dimming zones only displaying darker content. Bright biasing increases these ‘halos’ and makes them more widespread; more generally, it can negatively impact shade depth for medium to dark shades if brighter shades are mixed in. On the plus side, bright biasing can improve the ‘pop’ and wow factor even for smaller bright areas and prevent medium to bright shades being dragged down and ‘muddied’ by surrounding darker shades.
PWM (Pulse Width Modulation)
Luminance uniformity
The SpyderX Elite was used to assess the uniformity of lighter shades, represented by 9 equally spaced white quadrants running from the top left to bottom right of the screen. The table below shows the luminance recorded at each quadrant as well as the percentage deviation between each quadrant and the brightest recorded point.
Luminance uniformity table
Luminance uniformity map
Colour temperature uniformity map
Contrast in games and movies
Lagom contrast tests
Adaptive Dimming (SDR)
Colour reproduction
Colour gamut
Colour gamut 'Test Settings'
Colour gamut 'Test Settings' vs. Adobe RGB
Colour gamut 'sRGB'
Colour gamut 'DCI'
Colour gamut AMD 'CTC disabled' setting
Colour in games and movies
Shade representation using SpyderCHECKR 24
The monitor outputs shades in a highly vibrant way, with significant extra saturation due to generous extension beyond sRGB in various regions of the gamut. This provides a definite punchiness to red-biased shades with medium orange (3), tango pink (11) and candy apple red (14) looking livelier than intended. There’s also a red push to peach pink (20), although not as extreme as it appears in the photo, and to light chocolate brown (24). Lemon yellow (10) has a bit of an orange push whilst Gamboge (23) appears with too much of a rich saffron tone. There’s significant extra saturation to aquamarine (4), dark lime green (18) and yellow green (19) – the extra saturation for these three shades was more apparent by eye than it appears in the photo. Colour consistency is strong overall, without the clear saturation shifts observed on VA or TN models depending on the on-screen position of the shade. There are slight shifts in places for uniformity reasons but these were minor and exaggerated slightly in the photo. The image below shows how things appeared with ‘Color Space’ set to ‘sRGB’.
The saturation levels have now been constrained significantly. Cerulean (2) is now a bit undersaturated, whilst aquamarine (4) appears a bit of an icy blue now. Lemon yellow (10) and yellow green (19) are undersaturated, with the latter having a bit too much of a yellow push. The undersaturation of aquamarine (4) and lemon yellow (10) is exaggerated in the photo. Peach pink (20) still has a bit of a red push, but less so than before. Most of the remaining shades are presented well and more appropriately than under the native gamut. As usual, we’d recommend profiling the monitor with your own calibration device if you require the highest level of colour accuracy.
Viewing angles
The video below shows the Lagom text test, a mixed desktop background, game scene and dark desktop background from various viewing angles. The colour shifts for the mixed desktop background and game scene are relatively minor, significantly lower than you’d observe on VA or TN models. There’s some ‘hazing’ (contrast loss) from sharper angles, though this is at quite a typical level for an IPS-type panel. It creeps in more quickly (starting at less steep angles) horizontally than on some IPS models. The dark desktop background highlights ‘IPS glow’, which blooms out as viewing angle increases. This is more colourful than usual, generally appearing a blue or cyan to purple depending on angle. It’s also less bright and doesn’t bloom out as much from shallower angles as on most IPS models. The dark background is also shown with ‘Adaptive Dimming’ set to ‘Average’, showing a ‘blooming’ surrounding brighter shades which flares out when viewed from an angle – the black of the background is significantly deeper in comparison as the dimming zones are set to extremely low levels there.
Interlace pattern artifacts
Responsiveness
Input lag
Perceived blur (pursuit photography)
Responsiveness in games and movies
VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) technology
FreeSync – the technology and activating it
The Acer supports a variable refresh rate range of 48 – 160Hz. That means that if the game is running between 48fps and 160fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 160fps, the monitor will stay at 160Hz and the GPU will respect your selection of ‘VSync on’ or ‘VSync off’ in the graphics driver. With ‘VSync on’ the frame rate will not be allowed to rise above 160fps, at which point VSync activates and imposes the usual associated latency penalty. With ‘VSync off’ the frame rate is free to climb as high as the GPU will output (potentially >160fps). AMD LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) is also supported by this model, which means that the refresh rate will stick to multiples of the frame rate where it falls below the 48Hz (48fps) floor of operation for FreeSync. If a game ran at 35fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 70Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. LFC usually activated at a slightly higher refresh rate of 55Hz or just slightly below – this slightly different floor of operation makes little difference in practice. This feature is used regardless of VSync setting, so it’s only above the ceiling of operation where the VSync setting makes a difference.
Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set a few frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 157fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. If you activate the ‘Refresh Rate Num’ setting in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD, this will display the refresh rate of the display and therefore indicate the frame rate if FreeSync is active and the frame rate is within the variable refresh rate range of the display. Finally, it’s worth noting that FreeSync only removes stuttering or juddering related to mismatches between frame rate and refresh rate. It can’t compensate for other interruptions to smooth game play, for example network latency or insufficient system memory. Some game engines will also show stuttering (or ‘hitching’) for various other reasons which won’t be eliminated by the technology.
FreeSync – the experience
Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (‘G-SYNC Compatible’)
You will also see in the image above that it states: “Selected Display is not validated as G-SYNC Compatible.” This means Nvidia hasn’t specifically tested and validated the display, not that it won’t work. On our RTX 3090 the experience was very similar to what we described with FreeSync. With the technology getting rid of tearing and stuttering from what would otherwise be frame and refresh rate mismatches, within the VRR range (typically ~55Hz – 160Hz in our testing). Though an LFC-like frame to refresh multiplication technology was employed below that to keep tearing and stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. There was again a subtle momentary stuttering as the boundary was crossed, as we observed with our AMD GPU as well. Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than AMD Software to control this. The setting is found in ‘Manage 3D settings’ under ‘Vertical sync’, where the final option (‘Fast’) is equivalent to AMD’s ‘Enhanced Sync’ setting. You’ll also notice ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ listed under ‘Monitor Technology’ in this section, as shown below. Make sure this is selected (it should be if you’ve set everything up correctly in ‘Set up G-SYNC’).
Note again that you can activate the ‘Refresh Rate Num’ setting in the ‘Gaming’ section of the OSD. This displays the refresh rate of the display and therefore indicates the frame rate if that is within the VRR window (~55 – 160Hz in our testing). This is a useful indication that the technology is active. And as with AMD FreeSync, HDR can be used at the same time as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and ‘Adaptive Dimming’ can be used..
HDMI 2.1 VRR
HDR (High Dynamic Range)
*Multiple users on our forum have confirmed that HDR does not appear to work correctly on the PS5, being clearly much darker than it should be. There seems to be a tone mapping issue specific to this console when using this monitor.
Colour gamut 'Test Settings'
With this, the monitor can provide a good level of vibrancy where the developers intended it to be present. Though saturation levels for some shades seemed slightly more subdued than we’d expect from such a gamut. Some of the lush greens of vegetation, for example, didn’t look as lush and saturated as we’ve seen on some models with a similar gamut (including the PG32UQX). They still appeared rich and far from washed out, at least in brighter scenes where the dark-biasing which we explore shortly doesn’t dull them down so much. Roaring flames appeared with nice deep orange and some vivid reddish oranges, suitably toned down compared to under SDR. Elements such as bright greenish yellow citrus fruit, orange berries and purple flowers appeared vivid, but to a slightly lesser extent than we’ve seen on some models with similar gamut capability. Because the developers have wider gamuts than sRGB in mind for HDR, we didn’t observe the oversaturation we saw using the native gamut under SDR. Sky blues were toned down (though didn’t appear ‘underdone’) and skin tones appeared more appropriate as well – Lara Croft had an overly rich and tanned appearance under SDR but not HDR. Greens didn’t appear with the somewhat neon look or with overpowering yellows as we observed under SDR. Though again, we would’ve expected some greens to appear a bit more vibrant than they did if the gamut was put to appropriate use.
The ‘4K’ UHD experience
The large screen size also provided a good level of immersion, but not in a way we felt was too overwhelming from our preferred viewing distance (eyes ~70cm from the screen most of the time). The relatively large screen is also more practical should you wish to move back a bit, compared to smaller screens. The pleasing pixel density bolstered the definition and clarity for us in a similar way to what’s described in the article. Whilst the effect was not quite as extreme as with the smaller screen, it’s still something we were readily aware of compared to models with a significantly lower pixel density, including 27” QHD screens. Having this level of detail and clarity spread out across a relatively large screen area was also enjoyable. Even for graphically ‘simple’ titles, there was a certain definition to objects and edges as you look into the distance on the game, beyond what you’d see with a significantly lower pixel density regardless of graphical settings or filters applied. Things were particularly impressive on more graphically demanding titles, with the eye candy turned up a bit – the definition was then evident on textures, particle effects and the like. The images below show the monitor running various game titles at the native resolution. These are purely for illustrative purposes and in no way indicate how the monitor appears in person.
Interpolation and upscaling
The monitor includes some scaling options under ‘System’ – ‘Wide Mode’. As explored in this section of the OSD video you need ‘FreeSync Premium Pro’ disabled, which unlocks the ‘Ultra-Low Latency’ setting – and this must also be disabled. Where scaling is supported, the monitor defaults to using ‘Wide Mode’ and uses interpolation to fill up the screen and use all pixels whether using Adaptive-Sync or not. Running the monitor in either 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p) or 2560 x 1440 (QHD or 1440p), there was a moderate amount of softening. Particularly noticeable for Full HD. This could be offset using the ‘Super Sharpness’ setting – though this gave an over-sharpened look which looked quite odd for the Full HD resolution but better for the QHD resolution. Overall the interpolation performance here was passable and worked fairly well for the QHD resolution when using ‘Super Sharpness’, but we would’ve preferred greater sharpness control flexibility rather than the single fairly extreme sharpness filter toggle offered here. The additional options, where available, are ‘Aspect’ which will use as many pixels as possible whilst sticking to the aspect ratio and ‘1:1’, a pixel mapping setting that only uses the pixels called for in the source resolution and blacks out unused pixels.
Video review
Timestamps:
Features & Aesthetics
Contrast
Adaptive Dimming (SDR)
Colour reproduction
HDR (High Dynamic Range)
Responsiveness (General)
Responsiveness (VRR)
Conclusion
Positives Negatives Strong vibrancy and colour consistency from the IPS-type panel with a generous gamut (full Adobe RGB and strong DCI-P3 coverage) and decent sRGB emulation mode with adjustable brightness
sRGB emulation setting lacks colour channel or gamma adjustment, HDR vibrancy a touch lower than expected for the gamut (but still at a good level) Reasonable static contrast, reduced intensity of ‘IPS glow’ and a dynamic local dimming solution usable in both SDR and HDR which dark biases to help maintain strong shade depth Some ‘IPS glow’ ate away at detail and atmosphere (largely eliminated with ‘Adaptive Dimming’), zone count still low compared to pixel count which limits precision, some shades dragged down so they’re dimmer than intended Impressively low input lag and strong pixel responses, putting the 160Hz refresh rate to good use – diverse range of VRR options also provided Moderate overshoot with ‘Normal’ (some will prefer ‘Off’) overdrive setting, becoming stronger at lower refresh rates Strong pixel density provides excellent detail and clarity with pleasing ‘desktop real estate’. Good ergonomics and HDMI 2.1 plus USB-C support with 90W PD High price tag (more so in some regions than others), ‘Adaptive Dimming’ and RGB adjustments set universally rather than remembered for SDR and HDR or different presets
