Acer XG270HU vs Asus MG279Q vs Benq XL2730

(62)
(127)
(127)
Acer XG270HU
Asus MG279Q
Benq XL2730

Top Prices

Laptops Direct
Checked 7 hours ago
Standard delivery: £9.95
In stock
Ebuyer
Checked 4 hours ago
Standard delivery: £4.19
In stock, only 8 left!
eBay
Checked 4 hours ago
Servers Direct
Checked 5 hours ago
Delivery unknown
In stock
eBay
Checked 4 hours ago
Standard delivery: £82.11
Overclockers UK
Checked 10 hours ago
Delivery unknown
In stock
Amazon UK
Checked 55 minutes ago
Out of stock
eBay
Checked 4 hours ago
Standard delivery: £15.00
Amazon UK
Checked 21 minutes ago
FREE Standard delivery
In stock
Ebuyer Business
Checked 17 hours ago
Standard delivery: £4.19
In stock, only 4 left!

Reasons For

4 Reasons For
Slightly bigger display diagonal (metric) Edit
The Acer XG270HU is a 68.6cm display diagonal PC monitor, whereas the Asus MG279Q is only a 68.47cm display diagonal PC monitor (0.13cm smaller).
Three times faster response time Edit
The Acer XG270HU is a 1ms response time PC monitor, and so does the Benq XL2730. That's 3ms faster than the Asus MG279Q (1ms). Read more

The response time on a PC monitor is a measure of how quickly the monitor reacts to image data sent by the computer's graphics card. Fast response times are particularly important for gamers, who should ideally look for a response time of 8 milliseconds or less.

A faster (shorter) response time is better because fast moving graphics will appear smoother and the gaming experience will feel more responsive.

4kg lighter Edit
The Acer XG270HU is a 3.5kg weight PC monitor. That's 3.8kg lighter than the Asus MG279Q (7.5kg) and 4kg lighter than the Benq XL2730 (7.5kg).
£62 cheaper
The Acer XG270HU is £62.01 cheaper than the Asus MG279Q and £112.02 cheaper than the Benq XL2730.
11 Reasons For
18° wider viewing angle, vertical Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 178° vertical viewing angle PC monitor. That's 18° wider than the Benq XL2730 (160°).
Slightly wider viewing angle, horizontal Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 178° horizontal viewing angle PC monitor, whereas the Benq XL2730 is only a 170° horizontal viewing angle PC monitor (8° narrower).
29% larger color gamut Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 100% color gamut PC monitor. That's 28% larger than the Benq XL2730 (72%).
Two HDMI ports quantitys Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a two HDMI ports quantity PC monitor, and so does the Benq XL2730, whereas the Acer XG270HU only has one HDMI ports quantity.
Three USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys Edit
The number of USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys on the Asus MG279Q is three, but the Benq XL2730 only has two USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys. Read more

We do not know the number of USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys on the Acer XG270HU. It is possible that it does not have any USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys.

Height adjustment Edit
The Asus MG279Q has a height adjustment, and so does the Benq XL2730, however the Acer XG270HU does not.
Available from 3 shops
A greater number of retailers increases the price competition amongst retailers for this PC monitor and also increases the chances of the product remaining in stock.
Cheaper to run by £67.43
The Asus MG279Q is £67.43 cheaper to run than the Benq XL2730 over five years. Read more
More popular
The Asus MG279Q is a more popular choice amongst buyers. It ranks No. 2651 by sales volume in our PC monitors, whereas the Acer XG270HU ranks No. 50226 and the Benq XL2730 ranks No. 7021.
Eleven more awards
The Asus MG279Q has 19 awards, but the Acer XG270HU has 8 awards and the Benq XL2730 has 11 awards.
Expert reviews are better
Based on 37 reviews, the Asus MG279Q has an average expert review score of 86%, whereas the Acer XG270HU has an average rating of 70% (based on 21 reviews) and the Benq XL2730 has an average rating of 81% (based on 30 reviews).
4 Reasons For
Three times faster response time Edit
The Benq XL2730 has a response time of 1ms (as does the Acer XG270HU), whereas the Asus MG279Q is a 4ms response time PC monitor (3ms slower). Read more

The response time on a PC monitor is a measure of how quickly the monitor reacts to image data sent by the computer's graphics card. Fast response times are particularly important for gamers, who should ideally look for a response time of 8 milliseconds or less.

A faster (shorter) response time is better because fast moving graphics will appear smoother and the gaming experience will feel more responsive.

One more HDMI ports quantity Edit
The number of HDMI ports quantitys on the Benq XL2730 is two (as does the Asus MG279Q), but the Acer XG270HU only has one HDMI ports quantity.
Height adjustment Edit
The Benq XL2730 has a height adjustment (as does the Asus MG279Q), whereas the Acer XG270HU does not have a height adjustment.
Marginally better user reviews
The average user review score of the Benq XL2730 is 95% based on 97 reviews, but the average rating of the Acer XG270HU is 92% (based on 41 reviews) and the average rating of the Asus MG279Q is 73% (based on 90 reviews).

Reasons Against

8 Reasons Against
Only one HDMI ports quantity Edit
The Acer XG270HU is a one HDMI ports quantity PC monitor, whereas the Benq XL2730 only has two HDMI ports quantitys.
Does not have a height adjustment Edit
The Acer XG270HU does not have a height adjustment, but the Asus MG279Q and the Benq XL2730 have a height adjustment.
Fewer sellers
Only 14 retailers sells the Acer XG270HU, but 15 shops sell the Asus MG279Q. Read more
The smaller the number of stores that stock this PC monitor, the lower the competition amongst stores to keep prices low.
Seven months older
The Acer XG270HU is older than the Asus MG279Q by seven months and older than the Benq XL2730 by one month.
Worse selling
The Acer XG270HU ranks No. 50226 by sales volume, whereas the Asus MG279Q ranks No. 2651 and the Benq XL2730 ranks No. 7021.
Fewer awards
Whilst the Acer XG270HU has received 8 awards, the Asus MG279Q has received 19 awards and the Benq XL2730 has received 11 awards.
A lot Lower expert review Score
The average expert rating of the Acer XG270HU is only 70%, whereas the average expert rating of the Asus MG279Q is 86% (based on 37 reviews) and the Benq XL2730 is 81% (based on 30 reviews).
Marginally Lower user review Score
The average user rating of the Acer XG270HU is 92%, whereas the average user rating of the Benq XL2730 is 95% (based on 97 reviews).
5 Reasons Against
0.13cm smaller display diagonal (metric) Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 68.47cm display diagonal PC monitor, whereas the Acer XG270HU is a 68.6cm display diagonal PC monitor (0.13cm bigger).
Slower response time Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 4ms response time PC monitor. That's 3ms slower than the Acer XG270HU and the Benq XL2730 (1ms). Read more

The response time on a PC monitor is a measure of how quickly the monitor reacts to image data sent by the computer's graphics card. Fast response times are particularly important for gamers, who should ideally look for a response time of 8 milliseconds or less.

A faster (shorter) response time is better because fast moving graphics will appear smoother and the gaming experience will feel more responsive.

Heavier Edit
The Asus MG279Q is a 7.3kg weight PC monitor. That's 3.8kg heavier than the Acer XG270HU (7.5kg) and 200g lighter than the Benq XL2730 (7.5kg).
£62 more expensive
The Asus MG279Q is more expensive than the Acer XG270HU by £62.01.
Significantly Lower user review Score
The average user rating of the Asus MG279Q is only 73%, whereas the average user rating of the Acer XG270HU is 92% (based on 41 reviews) and the Benq XL2730 is 95% (based on 97 reviews).
12 Reasons Against
Narrower viewing angle, vertical Edit
Benq XL2730 is only 160° vertical viewing angle, but the Asus MG279Q is a 178° vertical viewing angle PC monitor (18° wider).
5% narrower viewing angle, horizontal Edit
Benq XL2730 is only 170° horizontal viewing angle. That's 8° narrower than the Asus MG279Q (170°).
28% smaller color gamut Edit
The Benq XL2730 has a color gamut of 72%, but the Asus MG279Q is a 100% color gamut PC monitor (28% larger).
One less USB Type-A downstream ports quantity Edit
The Benq XL2730 has two USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys, however the Asus MG279Q only has three USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys. Read more

We do not know the number of USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys on the Acer XG270HU. It is possible that it does not have any USB Type-A downstream ports quantitys.

Hugely heavier Edit
The Benq XL2730 has a weight of 7.5kg, but the Acer XG270HU is a 3.5kg weight PC monitor (4kg lighter) and the Asus MG279Q is a 7.3kg weight PC monitor (200g lighter).
More expensive by £112
The Benq XL2730 is £112.02 more expensive than the Acer XG270HU and £50.01 more expensive than the Asus MG279Q.
Not as many stockists
The Benq XL2730 is only stocked by 12 sellers, however the Acer XG270HU is stocked by 14 sellers and the Asus MG279Q is stocked by 15 stores. Read more
Fewer numbers of shops reduces the chances of the product remaining in stock and also reduces the price competition amongst retailers for this PC monitor.
Older by six months
The Benq XL2730 is six months older than the Asus MG279Q.
Higher running costs over five years by £67.43
The running costs of the Benq XL2730 are £166.65 which is £67.43 more than the Asus MG279Q over five years. Show assumptions.
Less popular
The Benq XL2730 is a less popular choice amongst buyers. It ranks No. 7021 by number of sales in our PC monitors, but the Asus MG279Q ranks No. 2651.
Eight less awards
The Benq XL2730 has only received 11 awards, however the Asus MG279Q has received 19 awards.
Expert review Rating is Worse
The Benq XL2730 has an average expert score of 81%, but the Asus MG279Q has an average expert rating of 86% (based on 37 reviews).

Awards

8 Awards
guru3d.com: Recommended
HEXUS.net: Approved
hispazone.com: Best for Games
tomshardware.co.uk: Editor Recommended
tomshardware.com: Editor Recommended
tomshw.it: Editor Recommended
ua.gecid.com: The Choice of Gamers
vido.com.ua: Recommended
19 Awards
3dnews.ru: Recommended
chip.com.my: Editor's Choice
cnews.cz: Smart Buy
guru3d.com: Recommended
hardware.info: Excellent
HEXUS.net: Recommended
insidegeeks.net: Recommended
itwriter.ru: Recommended
kitguru.net: Worth Buying
legitreviews.com: Recommended
nordichardware.se: Best Product
pclab.pl: Recommended
pcper.com: Gold
profesionalreview.com: Platinum
SweClockers.com: Good Product
thg.ru: Recommended
tomshardware.co.uk: Editor Recommended
tomshardware.com: Editor Recommended
tomshw.it: Editor Recommended
11 Awards
avforums.com: Recommended
chip.com.my: Outstanding
hardwareheaven.com: Performance Award
PC Mag: Editor's Choice
pcgameware.co.uk: Silver
tek.no: Recommended
tomshardware.co.uk: Editor Recommended
tomshardware.com: Editor Recommended
tomshw.it: Editor Recommended
XSreviews.co.uk: Editor's Choice
xtremehardware.com: Performance Award

Average Expert Rating

Average User Rating

Date Released

24 months Ago 18 months Ago 24 months Ago

Running Costs Over 5 Years

Electricity cost - switched on £ -
Electricity cost - standby £ -
Total running cost £ -
Electricity cost - switched on £ 99.22
Electricity cost - standby £ -
Total running cost £ 99.22
Purchase price £ 349.99
Total cost of ownership £ 449.21
Details
Electricity cost - switched on £ 166.65
Electricity cost - standby £ -
Total running cost £ 166.65
Purchase price £ 400.00
Total cost of ownership £ 566.65
Details

Energy Efficiency Class

No data No data No data

Environmental Impact

No data
0.49T
Running this PC monitor over 5 years will generate 0.49 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2).
13
To offset that much CO2 you would need to plant and grow them for 10 years.
0.83T
Running this PC monitor over 5 years will generate 0.83 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2).
21
To offset that much CO2 you would need to plant and grow them for 10 years.

Display

Display Diagonal
27" 27" 27"
Contrast Ratio (dynamic)
 100000000:1
BEST
 100000000:1
BEST
 100000000:1
Display
 LED
 LED
 LED
3D
 3D
 3D
Unknown - Click to provide data
Supported Graphics Resolutions
 2560 x 1440
 2560 x 1440
 2560 x 1440
Display Surface
 Matt
 Matt
 Matt
HD Type
 Wide Quad HD
BEST
 Wide Quad HD
BEST
 Wide Quad HD
HDCP
Unknown - Click to provide data
 HDCP
 HDCP
Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL)
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL)
Unknown - Click to provide data
Display SRGB
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Display sRGB
Unknown - Click to provide data
Digital Vertical Frequency
Unknown - Click to provide data 35 - 144 Unknown - Click to provide data
Digital Horizontal Frequency
Unknown - Click to provide data 51.2 - 221.97 Unknown - Click to provide data
Viewable Size, Vertical
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 335.66mm
Viewable Size, Horizontal
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 596.74mm
Aspect Ratio
 16:9
 16:9
 16:9
Pixel Pitch
Unknown - Click to provide data 0.233 x 0.233 0.233 x 0.233
Display Colour Count
16.77M Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data
Viewing Angle, Vertical
Unknown - Click to provide data 178°
BEST
160°
Viewing Angle, Horizontal
Unknown - Click to provide data 178°
BEST
170°
Contrast Ratio (typical)
 1000:1
 1000:1
BEST
 1000:1
BEST
Display Diagonal (metric)
68.6cm
BEST
68.47cm Unknown - Click to provide data
Display Technology
 TN+Film
 TN+Film
 TN+Film
Display Brightness
350 cd/m² 350 cd/m² 350 cd/m²
Response Time
1ms
BEST
4ms 1ms
BEST
Color Gamut
Unknown - Click to provide data 100%
BEST
72%
Native Aspect Ratio
 16:9
 16:9
 16:9
Display Number of Colours
 16.78 million colours
 16.78 million colours
 16.78 million colours

Ports & Interfaces

Headphone Out
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data
 Headphone out
Microphone in
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data
 Microphone in
DisplayPorts Quantity
1 1 1
HDMI Ports Quantity
1 2
BEST
2
BEST
Mini DisplayPorts Quantity
Unknown - Click to provide data 1 Unknown - Click to provide data
VGA (D-Sub) Ports Quantity
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 1
DVI Port
1 Unknown - Click to provide data 1
USB Type-A Downstream Ports Quantity
Unknown - Click to provide data 3
BEST
2
USB Hub Version
 USB 3.0 (3.1 Gen 1)
 USB 3.0 (3.1 Gen 1)
 USB 3.0 (3.1 Gen 1)
AC (power) in
 AC (power) in
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data

Multimedia

Built-In Speaker(s)
 Built-in speaker(s)
 Built-in speaker(s)
Unknown - Click to provide data
Built-In Camera
 Built-in camera
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Built-in camera
RMS Rated Power
Unknown - Click to provide data 4W Unknown - Click to provide data
Number of Loudspeakers
Unknown - Click to provide data 2 Unknown - Click to provide data
TV Tuner Integrated
 TV tuner integrated
 TV tuner integrated
 TV tuner integrated

Design

Colour of Product
 Black
 Black
 Black

Thin Client

Thin Client Installed
 Thin client installed
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Thin client installed

Ergonomics

Pivot Angle
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 0 - 90
Height Adjustment
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 140mm
Height Adjustment
 Height adjustment
 Height adjustment
BEST
 Height adjustment
BEST
Tilt Angle
-5 - 15 20 - -5 -5 - 20
Tilt Adjustment
 Tilt adjustment
 Tilt adjustment
 Tilt adjustment
Swivelling
 Swivelling
 Swivelling
 Swivelling
Swivel Angle Range
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data -45 - 45
VESA Mounting
Unknown - Click to provide data
 VESA mounting
 VESA mounting
Pivot
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Pivot
 Pivot
On/off Switch
 On/off switch
 On/off switch
Unknown - Click to provide data
Number of OSD Languages
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data 17
On Screen Display (OSD)
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data
 On Screen Display (OSD)
LED Indicators
Unknown - Click to provide data Unknown - Click to provide data
 LED indicators

Power

Power Consumption (PowerSave)
Unknown - Click to provide data 0.5W 0.5W
Power Consumption (off)
Unknown - Click to provide data 0.5W 0.5W
Power Consumption (typical)
Unknown - Click to provide data 38.7W
BEST
65W
Power Consumption (max)
Unknown - Click to provide data 38.7W Unknown - Click to provide data
AC Input Voltage
 90-264
 9
 90
 90-264
 9
 90
 90-264
 9
 90

Certificates

Certification
 MPR II
 RoHS
BEST
 MPR II
 RoHS
BEST
 MPR II
 RoHS
Energy Star Certified
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Energy Star certified
 Energy Star certified

Weight & Dimensions

Package Weight
Unknown - Click to provide data 10.5kg
BEST
10.8kg
Package Height
Unknown - Click to provide data 452mm
BEST
703mm
Package Depth
Unknown - Click to provide data 224mm
BEST
245mm
Package Width
Unknown - Click to provide data 753mm 486mm
BEST
Weight With Stand
3.9kg
BEST
7.3kg Unknown - Click to provide data
Height (with Stand)
451mm
BEST
559mm 557.4mm
Depth (with Stand)
206mm
BEST
238mm 226mm
Width (with Stand)
614mm
BEST
625mm 633.7mm
Weight
3.5kg
BEST
7.3kg 7.5kg
Height
368mm 368mm 372.6mm
Depth
37.5mm 63mm 61mm
Width
614mm 625mm 633.7mm

Packaging Content

Quick Start Guide
Unknown - Click to provide data
 Quick start guide
Unknown - Click to provide data
Cables Included
 DVI
 AC
 DisplayPort
 USB
 DVI
 AC
 DisplayPort
 USB
 DVI
 AC
 DisplayPort
 USB
Feedback