These are the differences that I’ve noticed (if this site for comparing monitors is to be trusted, because official sites don’t have super detailed specs):
| AOC | Acer | |
|---|---|---|
| Brightness | 300 cd/m² | 250 cd/m² |
| Dynamic contrast | 80.000.000 : 1 | 100.000.000 : 1 |
| HDR | / | HDR10 |
| Minimum response time (I assume GTG) | 4 ms | 2 ms |
| Whatever this other respons time is | Response time - 1 ms (MPRT - Motion Picture Response Time) | Response time - 1 ms (VRB - Virtual Response Boost) |
| Power consumption (average) | 22W | 25W |
| Connectivity | 2 x HDMI 1.4, 1 x DisplayPort 1.2 ,1 x D-sub, 1 x 3.5 mm Audio In ,1 x 3.5 mm Audio Out | 2 x HDMI 2.0, 1 x DisplayPort 1.2, 1 x 3.5 mm Audio Out |
It also seems like Acer is 144Hz natively but it’s overclockable to 165Hz, while AOC is natively 165Hz, but I’m not sure because it’s not very clearly stated.
Acer is a bit pricier, but are those differences worth it?
How good is HDR? Is it worth it, or is it just whatever?
How bright is the environment you’ll be using it in & what is the cost difference in your region?
Personally, I’d be leaning towards the Acer. But if you operate in a really bright environment the AOC may be better for your needs.
HDR10 isn’t that big a deal at the brightness the ACER is capable of, but is a nice to have, ditto HDMI 2.0, chances are you’ll be using display port anyway.