Product comparison · 2 monitors

Acer Predator Z35 bmiphz vs Acer XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor

41specifications compared
16differ
25identical
14known for one product only

Key differences

Display diagonal
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:88.9 cm (35")
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:68.6 cm (27")
Display resolution
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:2560 x 1080 pixels
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:2560 x 1440 pixels
Native aspect ratio
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:21:9
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:16:9
Display technology
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:LCD
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:LED
HD type
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:QXGA
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:Quad HD
Display brightness (typical)
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:300 cd/m²
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:350 cd/m²
Screen shape
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:Curved
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:Flat
Supported graphics resolutions
- Predator Z35 bmiphz:2560 x 1080
- XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor:2560 x 1440

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only

Comparison of Predator Z35 bmiphz, XB271HUbmiprz
55 specifications	A Acer Predator Z35 bmiphz View product	B Acer XB271HUbmiprz computer monitor Model XB271HUbmiprz View product
Display9 differ
Display diagonalDiffers	88.9 cm (35")	68.6 cm (27")
Display resolutionDiffers	2560 x 1080 pixels	2560 x 1440 pixels
Native aspect ratioDiffers	21:9	16:9
Display technologyDiffers	LCD	LED
Touchscreen	No	No
HD typeDiffers	QXGA	Quad HD
Display brightness (typical)Differs	300 cd/m²	350 cd/m²
Response time	4 ms	4 ms
Screen shapeDiffers	Curved	Flat
Supported graphics resolutionsDiffers	2560 x 1080	2560 x 1440
Aspect ratioKnown for one	21:9	Unknown — not stated by the source
Contrast ratio (typical)Differs	3000:1	1000:1
Contrast ratio (dynamic)Known for one	100000000:1	Unknown — not stated by the source
Dynamic contrast ratio marketing nameKnown for one	Brilliant Contrast	Unknown — not stated by the source
Viewing angle, horizontal	178°	178°
Viewing angle, vertical	178°	178°
Display number of colours	16.78 million colours	16.78 million colours
3D	No	No
Panel typeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	IPS
Performanceidentical
NVIDIA G-SYNC	Yes	Yes
Multimedia1 differ
Built-in speaker(s)	Yes	Yes
Number of speakers	2	2
RMS rated powerDiffers	18 W	4 W
Built-in camera	No	No
Design1 differ
Market positioning	Gaming	Gaming
Product colourDiffers	Black	Black, Red
Ports & interfacesidentical
Built-in USB hub	Yes	Yes
USB hub version	3.2 Gen 1 (3.1 Gen 1)	3.2 Gen 1 (3.1 Gen 1)
USB Type-A downstream ports quantityKnown for one	4	Unknown — not stated by the source
HDMI ports quantity	1	1
DisplayPorts quantity	1	1
Number of upstream portsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	4
VGA (D-Sub) ports quantityKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	0
DVI portKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	No
Ergonomics2 differ
VESA mounting	Yes	Yes
Panel mounting interface	100 x 100 mm	100 x 100 mm
Cable lock slot	No	No
Height adjustment	Yes	Yes
Adjustable height (max)Differs	13 cm	15 cm
Tilt adjustment	Yes	Yes
Tilt angle rangeDiffers	-5 - 25°	-5 - 35°
PivotKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Power2 differ
Power consumption (typical)Differs	52 W	41 W
Power consumption (standby)Known for one	0.47 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power consumption (off)Known for one	0.42 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power consumption (PowerSave)Known for one	52 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
AC input voltage	100 - 240 V	100 - 240 V
Annual energy consumptionDiffers	69 kWh	60 kWh
Other features1 differ
On/off switch	Yes	Yes
TV tuner integrated	No	No
Energy efficiency class (legacy scale)Differs	A	B
Supplied AC adapter type	LED	LED
NVIDIA 3D VisionKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Thin Clientidentical
Thin client installed	No	No
Sustainabilityidentical
Sustainability certificatesKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	ENERGY STAR

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More monitor comparisons

All monitor comparisons