A comparison of specs, key information, reviews, and best pricing from top retailers
Last updated -- hours ago | Report incorrect information
Company ProductName Specs
Company ProductName Specs
What we think
The PerfectRec monitor team Learn more
Updated April 22, 2024·
If you prioritize a premium gaming experience with deep blacks and sharp contrast for HDR gaming, the Acer Predator X45 with its OLED panel is the superior choice for you, though it comes at a higher cost. However, if you're focused on competitive gaming with faster response times and a lower price point, the Gigabyte FI32Q-X would be more suitable, though it won't offer the same level of image quality for media consumption as the OLED. Neither is optimal for productivity tasks due to image clarity and text quality limitations. Give Feedback
this description is based on the product variant with some specs and product variant with some specs. At the time of writing, the variant with some specs cost some dollars and the variant with some specs cost some dollars.
Advantages of the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED)
- Best in class for casual gaming
- Good for media consumption
- Best in class contrast
- Best in class brightness
- Best in class response time
Advantages of the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS)
- The Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) has no clear advantages over the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED).
Key differences
Casual Gaming
9.8
5.9
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
270Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
400 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
600 nits
98.5 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.0 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is poor.
Competitive Gaming
6.4
5.3
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
270Hz
0.0 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.0 ms
48 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
48 - 270 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
400 nits
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is only fair for competitive gaming, while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is poor.
Productivity
4.0
4.8
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
83 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
91 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) and Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) are both poor for productivity, though the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is somewhat better.
Media Consumption
7.1
5.4
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
400 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
600 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is good for media consumption, while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is poor.
Cost
$1,200
$500
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) has a price of $1,200 and the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) costs $500.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
No
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is not suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
Yes
No
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR video editing and color grading while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
Yes
No
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing while the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) is not suitable for print photo editing.
Key similarities
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) are suitable for digital photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and the Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) | Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,200 | $500 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 45" | 32" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 3440 x 1440 | 2560 x 1440 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | LED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | IPS | |
Local Dimming Zones | |||
Local Dimming Zones | N/A | 16 | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 1000:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 1000 nits | 400 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | Unknown | 600 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | No | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | Unknown | 157 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 0.01 ms | 8 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 48 - 240 Hz | 48 - 270 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 8.5/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 10/10 | 7.6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 83 PPI | 91 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 3.8/10 | 6.1/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 4.9/10 | 6.1/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.0 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.0 Ports | 2 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.1 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.1 Ports | 0 | 2 | |
Micro HDMI Ports | |||
Micro HDMI Ports | 0 | 0 | |
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | |||
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
Give feedback
We're constantly perfecting our model
More comparisons for you
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. Gigabyte FO32U2P (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) vs. KTC M27T20 (VA MiniLED)
VS
Compare Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) vs. Dell AW2524H (IPS)
VS
Compare Gigabyte FI32Q-X (IPS) vs. LG 32UN650 (IPS)
VS
FAQs
Why trust us
This information was produced and vetted by the PerfectRec monitors team. We are a product research and recommendation organization that meticulously reviews and evaluates the latest monitor information and makes it digestible for you.
By the numbers
210
Monitors evaluated
10,500
Monitors stats compiled
15
Proprietary Monitors ratings developed
116,900
Recommendations made
17,535
Consumer hours saved
About the monitor team
Joe Golden, Ph.D
CEO and Monitors Editor
Joe is an entrepreneur and lifelong electronics enthusiast with a Ph.D in Economics from the University of Michigan.
Jason Lew
Staff Expert & Software Engineer
Jason is a staff expert and software engineer that has been making laptop recommendations for 7 years and moderates one of the largest laptop subreddits.
Chandradeep Chowdhury
Staff Expert & Software Engineer
Chandradeep is a staff expert and software engineer and expert in televisions and monitors. He’s been making monitor recommendations for ten years.
Featured in
