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?
The AOC only has last-gen HDMI. That alone would probably push me to the Acer. I don’t recommend OCing monitors, personally.
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.
