Acer announces extremely rare 16:9 5k 144hz monitor

[Tymbo]

Acer Announces Predator Helios AI Laptops with New Intel Core Ultra Processors and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50 Series Laptop GPUs

Acer also announced the all-new slim Predator Helios Neo 16S AI laptop and Predator XB323QX gaming monitor

news.acer.com

Acer has just announced a 31.5" 5k monitor with a base 144 hz refresh rate that can double at a lower resolution. However, the PPI is 183.

Would this be a nice monitor for a Mac, or would there be scaling(?) issues that make this not worth it?

edit: Title fix from 120 hz to 144 hz

 

[Chancha]

The pixel pitch is akin to a 24" 2160 4K screen, PPI is 186 which is slightly close to retina than the usual 27" 4K.

If someone use this for a Mac, the 1:2 scaling of course won't have issues as you are directly using a 5120x2880 buffer, but some may find the UI slightly too large since this is a 31.5" 5K vs the 27" 5K on ASD / iMac. For retina 1:2 on 31.5" it should be already 6K like the XDR Pro Display. So then if you increase the UI to say 3360x1890 then you will get the usual scaling limits on non-Pro/Max chips.

 

[turbineseaplane]

FINALLY!

I've always wanted a 32" 5K, as I my older eyes like a physically larger version of roughly 1440p actual on screen

Having that with perfect 2x retina has for so long been a dream of mine!

 

[turbineseaplane]

some may find the UI slightly too large since this is a 31.5" 5K vs the 27" 5K on ASD / iMac.

For me it would be PERFECT

I've never liked how Apple switched to things being physically smaller on screen at a given screen size (a long time ago now), and particularly so with getting older

I still remember running and loving 1440 x 900 on my 17" PowerBook Pro G4

 

[turbineseaplane]

A side note here

So so so many high resolution and high refresh rate monitors coming out

Apple really needs to get with it -- on all their devices -- and get "ProMotion" everywhere

 

[Fishrrman]

I've never been interested in (Mac standard) 27" 5k displays, because when run at the default "looks like 1440p", text displayed at normal font sizes is far too small for me. Unusable.

For several years now, I've been posting that what I'd like to see is a 32" 5k display -- but -- no one made a panel in that size.

Suddenly, things have changed.
I'm thinking that if Acer is introducing a 32" 5k display, that others will soon follow.

A 32" 5k display @ "looks like 1440p" would be IDEAL for me (with aging vision).
I sense it would be for a good number of others, as well.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I've never been interested in (Mac standard) 27" 5k displays, because when run at the default "looks like 1440p", text displayed at normal font sizes is far too small for me. Unusable.

For several years now, I've been posting that what I'd like to see is a 32" 5k display -- but -- no one made a panel in that size.

Suddenly, things have changed.
I'm thinking that if Acer is introducing a 32" 5k display, that others will soon follow.

A 32" 5k display @ "looks like 1440p" would be IDEAL for me (with aging vision).
I sense it would be for a good number of others, as well.

Same!

I really hope that panel becomes available in a few different models from various manufacturers

(the Acer aesthetic is not really my thing)

1440p @ perfect 2x retina ... on a physically 32" sized screen = PURRFECT

Let's not forget this is also HIGH REFRESH RATE! ("ProMotion")

Totally totally awesome

If there were only an OLED version ... oh well, can't have it all I guess

 

[EugW]

This should prove interesting at 186.5 ppi. It’s only 350 nits and 1000:1 contrast and Acer typically sells lower end stuff, but nonetheless I’d consider buying this purely because of the pixel density. Text would be a touch large but not too large. I’ve used a non-Retina 1920x1200 24” monitor (94.3 ppi) and the text size was acceptable, esp. if I set the monitor back a couple of inches. A Retina version of that would be 189 ppi. I’d actually prefer this ppi to the LG 6K 218 ppi, although the LG’s design is much nicer, being a knockoff of the Apple Pro Display XDR. My holy grail is ~200 ppi which would correspond to 5K 29.5”, but this is close enough.

It supports DisplayPort 1.4 along with 2x HDMI 2.1, a perfect match to my M4 Mac mini. Furthermore, using HDMI would free up one of my USB-C ports. The specs make no mention of HDCP, but I assume it supports HDCP 2.3.

It’s a fugly gaming monitor, but importantly, if Acer is selling this, it’s very likely others will be using this panel too. Acer is generally too low end to commission a custom panel. I wonder who makes this panel, and who else will be using it.

 

[EugW]

Digital Trends says the target release date isn’t until Q3.

Acer unveils its insanely sharp 5K gaming monitor

Acer's new 32-inch Predator XB323QX gaming monitor has a higher pixel density than 4K 27-inch gaming monitors.

www.digitaltrends.com

That could explain why there haven’t been more announcements yet from other companies using this panel. Cuz I can’t imagine a manufacturer selling this panel to only just Acer. The volume would just be too low in that scenario.

 

[Chuckeee]

Any news on a target price?

 

[EugW]

Any news on a target price?

Nope. They said they’d announce pricing closer to release, but release is Q3.

 

[xraydoc]

If it's significantly less expensive than some of the 6K displays coming out, I might be tempted -- could function as a poor-man's 6K with a scaled resolution of 2880x1620 or 3200x1800 and still look reasonably good without text being too tiny.

 

[EugW]

If it's significantly less expensive than some of the 6K displays coming out, I might be tempted -- could function as a poor-man's 6K with a scaled resolution of 2880x1620 or 3200x1800 and still look reasonably good without text being too tiny.

With the Apple 27" Studio Display and the M4 Mac mini, 3200x1800 is not supported. 2880x1620 is supported though. I would guess the resolution options on the Acer 5K would be the same as the Apple Studio Display. I believe the Mx Pro/Max/Ultra offers 3200x1800 though.



Fortunately for me, 2880x1620 would likely work reasonably well on the Acer. Text size at native 2X scaled 2560x1440 is a bit big for me on a 31.5" monitor.

 

[EugW]

^^^Relevant info here:

Why no 3200x1800 resolution on an M2 MacBook Air on a 5K display?

My preferred resolution is 3200x1800 on a 27" display. For some reason, the new M2 MacBook Air does not offer this resolution, neither on an LG Ultrafine 5K, nor the Apple Studio Display. Usin...

apple.stackexchange.com

The maximum horizontal resolution of the framebuffer for M1/M2 and M3 is limited to 6144 pixels. On the Max/Pro chips it is limited to 7680 pixels (source).

The scaled resolution is rendered in 4x times and then scaled down to the actual screen size. This means that Mac display adapter offers these maximum horizontal resolutions:

3K HiDPI scaled resolution on M1, M2 and M3 (3072 * 2 <= 6144 horizontal resolution)
4K HiDPI scaled resolution on M* Pro/Max (3840 * 2 <= 7680 horizontal resolution)
If you want to run a higher resolution you'll have to resort to a dummy/mirroring method which can be configured through tools like:

BetterDisplay - See here for more information.
SwitchResX

 

[PaulD-UK]

@EugW "With the Apple 27" Studio Display and the M4 Mac mini, 3200x1800 is not supported. 2880x1620 is supported though. I would guess the resolution options on the Acer 5K would be the same as the Apple Studio Display. I believe the Mx Pro/Max/Ultra offers 3200x1800 though."

Here's the Better Display list of options with an M4 Pro Mac mini and a DIY 5K iMac R1811 conversion display.
The starred options are HiDPI:

 

[EugW]

@EugW "With the Apple 27" Studio Display and the M4 Mac mini, 3200x1800 is not supported. 2880x1620 is supported though. I would guess the resolution options on the Acer 5K would be the same as the Apple Studio Display. I believe the Mx Pro/Max/Ultra offers 3200x1800 though."

Here's the Better Display list of options with an M4 Pro Mac mini and a DIY 5K iMac R1811 conversion display.
The starred options are HiDPI:
View attachment 2478301

Interesting that it is so different. What does BetterDisplay offer with the M4 (or Mx) non-Pro? Also, what is offered on that monitor without BetterDisplay?

Also, it’s curious that 2880x1620 is not offered. That or even better, something like 2720x1536 is what I would run with a 31.5” 5K. If there is nothing between 2560 and 3008, that would be a non-starter for me.

 

[PaulD-UK]

@EugW "...what is offered on that monitor without BetterDisplay?"

I wonder if the options you want are specific to a 4K monitor?
2880 is a neat /1.333 = x0.75 for a 4K monitor, but it's /1.7 = x0.5626 (corrected) for a 5K screen.
I can't ATM change mine to 4K to compare, and I only have an M1 mini to compare, but that is not hooked-up ATM.

 

[EugW]

@EugW "...what is offered on that monitor without BetterDisplay?"

I wonder if the options you want are specific to a 4K monitor?
2880 is a neat /1.333 = x0.75 for a 4K monitor, but it's /1.7 = x0.58823 for a 5K screen.
I can't ATM change mine to 4K to compare, and I only have an M1 mini to compare, but that is not hooked-up ATM.

View attachment 2478322

No, a friend just got an M4 Mac mini after selling his base 1st gen Mac Studio. He is using a 27” Apple Studio Display. macOS Sequoia natively offers 2880x1620 with the M4 (non-Pro) Mac mini, but he has now lost the 3200x1800 option that he had with the Mac Studio. He doesn’t use any custom rez apps, and never has.

That picture in post #13 above with the list of resolutions is his actual M4 + Studio Display setup.

BTW, note that there is no 3008x1692 option either. I was expecting he would lose 3200x1800, but the lack of 3008x1692 really surprised me. I was happy he has 2880x1620 though since that is what I’d use if available on a 31.5” 5K. However, your post illustrates that there is no guarantee 2880x1620 would be available with third party 5K monitors. You don’t even get it with BetterDisplay.

 

[EugW]

For reference, here is our 8-year old 2017 27" 5K Core i5 iMac. Both 3200x1800 and 2880x1620 are available in Ventura.

 

[Chancha]

For 3008x1692 to not show up for M4 mini is already puzzling, and for it to not show also for M4 Pro must mean it is a bug waiting to be fixed. This has been discussed in length in the 5k 120Hz thread. Until something changes, it remains a pretty big disadvantage in using external displays on any M4 based Macs.