Comments Locked

57 Comments

Back to Article

  • YukaKun - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Damn. Well done Asus! Even in IPS flavor!

    Finally a justification to SLI Titan X-Ps! Or maybe 4... Heh.

    Cheers!
  • r3loaded - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Needs two changes:

    1) Freesync instead of proprietary sync. Would be perfect for Freesync 2 in fact given the HDR support.
    2) Ditch the garish L33T G4M3R design. 12 year olds aren't the ones dropping four figures on a monitor.
  • Ninhalem - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    I wish we could upvote posts. Also an addon to your #2: add a VESA mount. I won't buy a monitor unless I have the ability to mount on my existing wall easily.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    I believe the monitor does have VESA mounting screw holes underneath the ROG "eye" design on the back of the monitor. You have unlatch and detach the existing monitor mount to view the VESA mounting holes.

    This happens to be a quickest link that I can demonstrate it, but it's at a Taiwanese review site for the Asus ROG PG348Q monitor.
    https://img.computerdiy.com.tw/2016-04-07-112031-8...
    https://www.computerdiy.com.tw/asus-rog-swift-pg34...
  • DanNeely - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Even if this one has a replaceable stand, the arc of red LEDs above it would still produce tacky backlighting.
  • surt - Saturday, January 14, 2017 - link

    That's like 10c worth of nontransmitting black paint to fix.
  • Speed3y - Friday, February 24, 2017 - link

    If it uses the same setup as the PG348Q (which it very likely will); then I can confirm the LEDs are located in the stand, not in the back of the screen. I have mine wall mounted and there are two metal contacts that provide current to the stand which I simply covered with electrical tape before mounting the VESA mounting bracket to the back of the screen.
  • TheJian - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Considering 95% of the high end is all Nvidia (at least the people this $1500-2000 monitor is aimed at), having freesync would limit your sales since it won't work with any of these people.

    Who would you sell this thing to on AMD's side if it even had freesync? Gsync means you can sell to people NOW and for the next six months that audience grows even more. You are asking the company to make a product that currently (and for the next 6 months) would have zero customers that can push it. Vega would have to sell massively (and HBM2 will see to it this doesn't happen) in order to make a monitor like this for that group of people. I really hope AMD releases a GDDR5x edition to help Vega sales VERY early on, or better yet, out of the gate. But then, if that was the case it should be selling NOW and it isn't.
  • Midwayman - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    If anything Fury GPUs owners would get more out of it than someone with an ultra high end titan X. Variable refresh is pretty much made for cards struggling to hit 60fps. Plus monitors are something that lasts a lot longer than a single GPU. I've been waiting for a 4k high refresh monitor for awhile and I'm on team red.
  • imaheadcase - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    Given AMD track record, you could very well get this monitor and in 4 years have a fast card that is in top performance for a few weeks.
  • CoD511 - Saturday, January 21, 2017 - link

    Gsync is quite literally a FPGA that can be changed to suit the needs in say, performing as a scalar which overdrives every pixel at dynamically.

    Variable refresh and ULMB are what it sold on initially, but as noted by TFTCentral, Gsync allows insane control over the panel it seems.
  • Chris383 - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    I use nvidia and amd. Will only be getting freesync monitors.
  • imaheadcase - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    So make it Freesync and alienate %90 of the gaming market. Don't work in marketing.
  • Rock1m1 - Sunday, January 15, 2017 - link

    Point of using Fsync when the GPUs would not even come close to powering it?
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    I wish we could downvote posts.

    Actually the changes i would like to see are:
    1) Bigger panel size. 27 inch is too small for 4K. You have to turn Windows DPi to 200% and then deal with horrible scaling issues (even in Win10) on everything Win32 not UWP based.
    2) Lower price - obviously. 1000 would be ok or 1200 max bringing it to the same level as 34-35 inch ultrawides (3440x1440).
  • CoD511 - Saturday, January 21, 2017 - link

    The monitor scalar is the Gsync FPGA programmed for the panel characteristics. So you can't make something Freesync when there's one scalar capable of it and it's Gsync. So for Freesync instead of Gsync, you just have to drop the ability to drive 144Hz at 4K at a response time low enough.
  • Borat - Tuesday, May 30, 2017 - link

    Totally agree on the design. It's ugly and really looks like it's for kids. And no kid will have $ 1.5k to spend on a monitor.

    Wake up ASUS, the high-end stuff should be aesthetic and not YOLO GAM3R H4CKER style.
  • Chris383 - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link

    +1 to this!
  • dstarr3 - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    First of all, like others are saying, truly hideous design unless you're 12. Secondly, BOY, do I want the GPU that can do 4K@144fps. Can't wait until two generations for now when we finally get one.
  • edzieba - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Eh, you can push triple-digit FPS today at UHD. The trick is not to grab the latest OMGWTFBBQ 2017 shooter and crank all the sliders up the the Maximum Compensating setting.
    And with older games (or newer games that don't prioritise graphical bling) then even a lower end card can do the same (go grab HL2 and see how far you can push the resolution up before you dip below 100FPS).
  • DanNeely - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    I suspect better GFX quality may make 4k120+ and 5k60 aspirational for even longer (unless 4k screens get traction a lot faster than I expect them to). OTOH as the refresh rate gets higher GSync/Freesync compatibility matters less because tearing is visible for half as long or the VSync's max latency penalty is half as high. Mostly for that reason I'm leaning to 4k120/144 over 5k60 as my next display even though for all non-gaming uses the latter would be preferable.
  • Guspaz - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    I'll agree that it's ugly, but 4K/144Hz is pretty much the perfect combination. Because you can do 4K for light stuff like general use and web browsing and videos, but do something like 1080p144 or 1440p144 for gaming. Best of both worlds.
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    I assume you have not seen any Acer designs? They are much much worse. Besides this only affects the backside. The front (you know the side you'll actually end up looking 99,99% of the time) is rather understated. The LED-s can all be turned off in OSD like on previous models.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Bezels are a bit large, but hopefully this is done on purpose, given that their "ultra thin" bezels on the PG279Q had terrible IPS backlight bleed, as the bezel frame didn't have enough mounting pressure around the border to properly seal in the backlight.
  • DanishDevil - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Check your PPI figure. Should be 163.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Yet another 27" monitor. The PC display industry is hopelessly stuck at that size. I switched to a 40" 4K Samsung TV and don't think I can ever go back to 27" again. The high refresh rate is one feature, but 40 inches of screen space is the desktop equivalent to iMax, providing a more immersive experience. But do your research, not all 4K TV's have low input lag and support uncompressed color (chrome 4:4:4) for crisp text.
  • Hxx - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Agree on the 27 inch size but Dont forget high input lag and yeah low refresh rate of TVs. If or better said When they make a 30+ inch display with the same specs, its gonna be epic.
  • UltraTech79 - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    My 50" TV has under 20ms lag 4k @ 60hz. $700. Much better deal than a 27" 144Hz 4k that would require 2k in GPU to even push.
  • damianrobertjones - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Your story is all well and good but it might have been nice to have informed people of the MODEL number for your Sammy screen!
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Sorry. The full model number is: UN40KU6300. The display is not perfect by any means, Only the HDMI 1 input can handle a PC at 60Hz and uncompressed color with minor ghosting, but there are other benefits. The remote is great for adjusting settings - better than buttons on most every PC monitor. The VA panel produces good color, contrast, and respectable viewing angles. It has it's own speakers, WiFi/ethernet, and Apps. And best of all, it was on sale at Best Buy for only $399. When you take everything into consideration ... it's a good experience.
  • willis936 - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Bigger isn't always better. I want to play stepmania in exclusive mode for lower input latency but 27" is noticeably too large for that. I can't see all of the notes coming up the screen.
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    I agree on the size issue. Especially on a 4K display regarding DPI scaling. However TV-s have several limitations the don't make them very vell suited for gaming: lack of DP ports and thus lack of variable refresh tehnologies and lack of high refresh rate. Yes you can find some OK TV-s with tolerable lag and size/inch ratio but that's about it.
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Red on black? Yup. Pointless lighting? Got it! Obnoxious product logo? Absolutely!

    Obviously, by combining all those attributes, this qualifies it as "gamer" hardware.
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    They'll produce pink/yellow just for you if you dont like red/black like 90% of the population. LED-s can be turned off in OSD. Logo - yeah obviously that's a BIG problem lol.
  • bill44 - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    With HDMI 2.1 please + Freesync 2 and compression.
  • jmelan - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    why can't anyone make a 32...4k at 27" is such a waste
  • damianrobertjones - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    A 32" screen hit first...

    "Why couldn't they make a 27" screen as 32" is too big"

    You just cannot win some days.
  • p1esk - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Looks like 30" 4k would be the winner. I'm typing this on 32" 4k with 27" 1440p as my second display.
  • jmelan - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    32 4k 16:9 or 16:10 at 120fps+ ??
  • DanNeely - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    There are some 32" (well 31.5") 4k screens out there; but between slightly lower costs and being a same size replacement for the more common 27" 2560x1440's have given the smaller size a major momentum advantage. As someone who currently has a PLP setup with 2x 20" 1200x1600's flanking a 30" 2560x1600 I'm wishing they'd've standardized on 32.5 instead of 31.5" for the next size up (closer physical height match). I probably will be buying a 31.5" at either 4k120/144 or 5k60 at some point this year as the closest to what I want that's actually available.
  • efficacyman - Tuesday, January 24, 2017 - link

    Consider looking at the LG 38UC99. It has the same vertical resolution and can be divided into 2 1920x1600 monitors as well. It has freesync and is capable of 75hz w/ AMD graphics. Unfortunately the pixel pitch dosent match the PLP setup so its not just a drop for your 30" landscape in for vertical height. So far I am happy with mine as the immersion for MMO gaming is fantastic.
  • boeush - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    IMO even 32" is too small for a monitor.

    Ergonomics-wise you're supposed to keep a monitor at arm's length from your eyes, unless you want extra eye strain and steadungly degrading vision.

    Without putting your nose up against the monitor, at 4k the optimal size would be more like 40" - IMO. Also, at that distance/span, a curved screen would actually help and make sense, for a change...
  • DanNeely - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    Depends what you're doing. While 30: 16:10 doesn't completely fill my vision at arms length it is big enough that when playing games that put important status indicators on the edge of the screen I tend to sit back slightly more to keep them from edging into my peripheral vision.
  • UltraTech79 - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    Its called a TV. Why do people keep separating them so much? This isnt the early 2000s anymore. Just do research a good PC gaming TV. Not all are good for desktop use.
  • andychow - Tuesday, January 17, 2017 - link

    I don't want 32". I want 27" 4k. Even 24" 4k. My cellphone is 1440p @ 5".
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    Your cellphone has no scaling issues. It's built from ground up to natevely support high DPI. Windows on the other hand has not. 24" 4K would be horrible.
  • damianrobertjones - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    They've probably been sat on this tech for a long time, waiting for the sales of standard screens to drop, ready to milk people of their money. All the others will now release the same type of screen and the tech snail race carries on.

    $1500-$2000 - No. Just absolutely no. There's no reason for this to cost that much.
  • R7 - Thursday, January 19, 2017 - link

    Yeah lol they had this gathering dust in a warehouse 7 years ago - NOT.
    The prototype of this was displayed mid 2016. It takes a while to mass produce panels with such specs (well the only such panel currently in existance). And for the record - i doubt others will follow anytime soon. There is still no competition to 165Hz IPS panel years after AUO introduced it.
  • Xajel - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Yes, FreeSync 2 version... But most importantly.. a 34" Ultrawide version
  • tk.icepick - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    Seconding the PPI number - I have a Samsung U28D590D, which at 700mm is about 27.55in, giving a PPI ≈ 159.9.

    As for the monitor...I may just treat myself to one when and if the price comes under 1K, assuming the total input lag (response time + processing) is under 10ms.

    Please review this panel!
  • vicbee - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    I think upcoming TVs with their guts set aside in a little box are the trend to come, eventually trickling down to gaming monitors: micro bezels, 2 mm thick panels held by magnets on a wall. No brainer.
  • mobutu - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link

    oh, why oh why the ugly fat bezels? :(
  • zodiacfml - Friday, January 13, 2017 - link

    Finally, 4K at 120Hz. They skipped the DP1.3 standard too. Looking at the rarity of the specs and supply of the panel, it looks this is to be close to $2,000 or more.
  • DanNeely - Saturday, January 14, 2017 - link

    4k144 needs DP1.4, without compression DP1.3 tops out at 4k120.
  • Rock1m1 - Sunday, January 15, 2017 - link

    People don't buy displays ever so often. So it is a sound idea to future proof it as much as possible. Sure the GPUs barely run 4K at 60fps, but that should not always be in the case in the future. With that in mind, I want this display so bad. Although I will be waiting for a long time to get one with all these features on a 34inch 21:9 curved display.
  • seansplayin - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Make a freesync version for $200 less and I'll bite
  • Chip23 - Wednesday, January 17, 2018 - link

    What about 3D support? Any Rumors?
    Now in ASUS Monitors G-Sync does automatically switched off in nVidia 3D Mode and the Panel works strictly on 120Hz refresh rate.
    The monitor can 144 Hz and approx 4ms response time, so then maybe in 120 Hz the response time will decrease to 2ms, so how it was previously on FHD 3D Ready 27" panel...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now