KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
CES was full of surprises this year and while we didn't end up getting a GTX 1080Ti announcement, we did get to see the first two 4K/144Hz gaming monitors hitting the market in 2017. During the first half of the year, not only will Asus be coming out with the ROG Swift PG27UQ, but Acer will be following it up with a Predator XB272-HDR, both monitors will support the new G-Sync HDR module while offering the highest refresh rate 4K display so far.
The Asus ROG Swift PG27UQ makes use of a Quantum Dot panel, so you can expect high colour accuracy. However, thanks to the addition of HDR, the colour gamut will actually be 25% wider than a lot of other monitors currently on the market, most of which use the sRGB colour format. This monitor in particular uses the DCI-P3 colour gamut for smooth gradients and high accuracy. This particular monitor will set you back by quite a bit though.
There has been some conflicting reports surrounding the cost of this monitor with some claiming $2000 and others claiming $1199. From what I have been told by our contacts, $2000 is the correct ballpark for this monitor, so we can estimate that this will work out around £1800/£1900 here in the UK. That is an estimate though, things could change in the months leading up to this hitting the market.
The Acer Predator XB272-HDR will also use a Quantum Dot panel and sport HDR, alongside Nvidia's new G-Sync HDR technology. On paper, based on the specifications we know so far, Acer's monitor is more or less identical to the Asus model, which indicates that this is the new standard Nvidia is aiming for with future G-Sync HDR monitors.
We don't have exact release dates for either of these monitors just yet, nor do we have a price point for Acer's model but we would expect it to be in a similar ball park to the $2000 Asus ROG Swift PG27UQ.
KitGuru Says: Both of these monitors sound incredible on paper but that price point does sting a bit. It could be a while before we see high refresh rate Ultra-HD displays drop below the £1000 mark. How much would you guys be willing to spend on a 4K/144Hz monitor?
Don’t like the new design Asus has been going with. I’ll stick to my Asus MG278 for a while, especially with those crazy prices.
I just want a 1080p with HDR and price that a normal people can pay.
After leaving my work-desk job 12 months ago, i’ve been lucky to stumble upon following superb job opportunity on-line which was a life-saver… They offer online jobs for people to freelance from their couch. Last payment after working for them for 4 months was 10000 bucks… Amazing fact about the job is that the only thing required is basic typing and connection to the internet… FL-Y.COM/3m09
Thats just crazy price. So no thanks.
I hate the S**T. Guess the job evolves doing paperwork for a Nigerian prince, who just got an inheritance…………….
That’s actually just to much. Even a lot of enthusiast would have to stretch h the self’s for a lets face it a £2000 monitor…
I guess those would be the only G-Sync 4K monitors, but I am not gonna shoot for them. FREESYNC FOR THE WIN! I won’t pay a penny to nVidia for a free feature that is BETTER than G-Sync
there also could be cheaper versions with freesync and without fake HDR
I heard G-Sync was actually higher quality than FreeSync.
G-Sync is better than Freesync. Freesync has ghosting because it cannot cancel frames like G-Sync can If you drop below a FPS. You will notice extreme ghosting with Freesync if this occurs. The latency is also far worse with Freesync. This is well known.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ylLnT2yKyA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzHxhjcE0eQ
Because it has bigger range of Hz. But it is the same thing. FreeSync now even works with HDMI 2.0. G-Sync even problems in games like Skyrim – big stutters. You have to switch it off to get higher FPS. Don’t pay for it, it’s not worth it. Get a better FreeSync monitor than a G-Sync one.
At around £1000 I would have been interested, but £2000 is seriously too much for me to contemplate at this point 🙁
Ah well, will see what kind of prices these monitors are in 2018.
What about Skyrim x64?
I paid around £1400 for two GTX1080’s so I would be happy to spend around that maybe a few hundred more to get the most out of them. I get around 110fps at 4k nightmare settings on Doom but don’t benefit from it due to the 60hz limit.
I don’t know. However they did not change anything, but only moved to another engine, so all the glitches from Skyrim are still there (therefore the unofficial patch). I would assume so for G-Sync.
You can go higher than 60 in Skyrim without the physics issues (as in they actually let you go higher rather than un-capping it yourself). So I would say yes.
I wouldnt spend a single penny on any of these.
Going back from a XB321HK 32″ 4K to a 27″ just stinks.
I’m waiting for the very next 4K 120+Hz 32+” monitor or they can say bye to meh moneyz.
G-Sync simply isn’t a ‘set and forget’ technology although Nvidia wants you to believe that.
To take full advantage of Gsync without tearing and extremely low input lag it actually requires a bit of in-depth knowledge about how G-sync works and how to set it up properly.
I dont get why 27″ is still the norm.
I have a XB321Hk 32″ 4k but i require a 120+hz version.
27″ would be a downgrade.
Plz acer/asus? Take my money??
It is…ignore this fantard lol.
How come freesync, which lock the refresh rate between 30hz-90hz better than gsync, which can go as high as 240hz?
I prefer 24″ ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I prefer 22.5″ ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Limited desk space from me to the wall combined with a somewhat narrow center vision means that I don’t really “see” the last inches of a 24″ monitor.
The full specifications shared via press release can be found below. On PC few games support HDR right now; Shadow Warrior 2 was the first one and Mass Effect: Andromeda will soon follow. Hopefully, game developers will accelerate support now that HDR monitors are finally about to hit the market.
Asus did just mention the price of the PG27UQ – it will retail at $1199, while there’s no word yet on the price of the Acer Predator display.
2000$ wtf its not a car. I understand the tech that is in it.. but its obvious they’re just scamming people with a high premium here and obvious cash grabs probably 1000% profit.
Yeah unfortunately amd doesnt have any cards right now that can push to 144fps 4k resolution. AMD VEGA has been on hold and nothing revealed since like forever now.
Sorry ,but g-sync is better than freesync. I’ve analyzed both very well and freesync is free because of that very reason.. cheap quality.
crossfire 🙂
There are no cards in crossfire that can push 144fps 4K from amd atm. if you know of any, please feel free to share.
Forget about G-Sync when HDMI 2.1 drops. Until then, Free-Sync is sufficient for me. I will not throw a good ultrawide IPS monitor just because it has a cheaper Variable refresh rate. There is no G-Sync version of it, and I am tired of nvidia’s rambling of exclusive features that AMD offers already…except for some of those GameWorks that not many games use…
It sounds like you cannot afford a g-sync monitor. rofl. Free-sync has a SHITTON of issues and most of the time it doesnt work. ive had g-sync and in not even 1 single instance have i found it to NOT.. be working. and it does exist on IPS panels as well. 🙂
$2000 frigign big ones for what essentially is the same crap that they are selling to us already.$2000?
wtf man…what did they add to make the price go tht far up? gold? diamonds? no nothing but a chip here and a chip there a bit of new software..this is madness…oh wait lets not forget the ” Quantum Dot pane” you can imagine how tht conversation will go:
“hey does yours have a Quantum Dot panel?”
“whats that bro”
“urrgh i dont know”
Yea if they are wanting us to pay 2 grand for this monitor we need a reason to do it. Over 30 inches would be a step in that direction. I currently have an Acer Predator XB270HU, which is 1440p 144hz Gsync, and it will take a competitive price for me to switch.
I’m sorry but that is just wrong. Gsync makes the 32fps I get in Wildlands play like 60 hz.
You can get a 55in HDR OLED for that much. I’ll pay 1000 happily, but not 2,000.
It’s not that i can not afford it, my FREESYNC monitor costs $1300, a G-Sync one is about the same price from Asus. However, there is NO EQUIVALENT monitor that matches the one I will be buying with FreeSync – Acer XR382CQK (38″ Ultrawide 3840×1600 IPS 75Hz). Do you know of ANY g-sync monitor with such resolution?
Both of those FreeSync and G-Sync will be dead after HDMI 2.1 releases, but that wont be so soon. Anyhow, if FreeSync doesn’t work well on my XR382CQK, i will just switch it off and play the old way with V-Sync. The premium price of G-Sync is not worth it, no matter how much you try to hype it. FreeSync may not work on some monitors but on others it works well, but the fact that there are many more monitor choices that come with FreeSync, shows very well that the industry chooses OPEN SOURCE, not some locked up ecosystem that a manufacturer asks for $$$ to give their chip and GPU that works well in sync.
I prefer 8″ ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Because I’m cant game at anything under 360hz…. ;D
Go to hell asus, 2000$ !
Thank u
Waiting for the 1440p 27inch hdr g-sync monitor
120 fps is waaay better then 60 fps
No Nvidia cards can do that either
Sorry to disappoint you pal, my two TItan Xp’s on water in SLI are pushing 100 + fps in most games at 4K atm.. So I’m still wondering what you’re talking about (:
Sli isnt supported very well in most games plus 100 does not equal 144
I gave you an average pal. For example in DOOM at 4K my 2 titan x in SLI are pushing 138 fps.. which is great. and yes.. 100-144-200 that’s what the G-sync is for, it’s within the range and it makes it all buttery smooth. There’s no vega cards that can push anything in CF atm over 100 fps in 4K… we been waiting vega for so long now. That’s the bottom point. That’s why manufacturers decided to go with G-sync even tho it’s a more expensive counter-part.. freesync 2 is not even close so..yea.. Also g-sync is actually better because there’s a chip controlling it all.. No i’m not an nvidia fanboy. I actually can’t wait for vega if it’s a good bang for the buck im building my wife’s ryzen build with those.
Yea. They’re not really adding anything new. Just HDR. My Samsung does 10 bit HDR and it’s significantly cheaper, and it’s a new model. I mean it obviously doesn’t have g-sync or a true refresh rate above 60, considering all 120hz tvs are fake, but really ? $2000? I will happily spend $1000 but 2?
First of all, no one cares about AMD and Vega. Volta will destroy it. And Volta will be revealed within the next year. And, Nvidia doesn’t have any cards to push 144fps 4k either – no one does. Not even with 2 Titan XPs.
No, they aren’t. It is literally impossible to get 100+ FPS or even close to it at 4k, even with two XPs, unless you are turning your graphics down severely. Stop lying. 100+ FPS at anything but ultra graphics doesn’t count as 100+ fps.
We reviewed a Titan Xp SLI system from PC Specialist and achieved over 100 frames per second at 4K in both Rise of the Tomb Raider and GTA V. I imagine it could also be done in games like Battlefield given how optimised that engine is. It all depends on the game.
http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/leo-waldock/titan-x-pascal-sli-at-5k-pc-specialist-leviathan-x-review/
Wonder no more. He said 144fps not 100fps.
Make a 32 inch or blow it. This market has become a joke. People want 32 inch not the same old 27 inch they already have. Everyone already has a 27 inch… how many people need to repeat that?! And for those who say i like 24 inch and 22 inch.. why are you looking at this 27 inch? Go look at the small monitors and shut up.
For 2k, it’s enough for a 55 oled TV, and we all know how much faster oled is. Will any one really buy because it refresh faster than the Human eye can see…..?
I 100% want 27inch
Ok great news for you!!! There are so many 27 inch monitors for sale right now, it will make ur head spin. Go buy one.
Human the human eye can see it. We have constant vision but everyone’s perception varies. Unfortunately, however, they keep pushing up the speed and doing nothing about motion blur. That’s the real problem. And of course there are no good 32 inch or 35 inch monitors that dont blur like looking at an oil painting evey time you pan ur mouse.
I had a look at a quontom dot monitor next to a normal IPS. No dirrerence at all on the desktop or when looking at pictures. As for the HDR some monitors are getting… again no difference unless the software has “HDR” so it makes me smell bullshit. Only thing i can think of that will improve picture is the multi rear backlighting. I guess thats what “HDR” is. A back lighting upgrade. So with this said, going forwards in time and using newer technology means we are forced to pay $2000 and getting ripped off just for being loyal to the gaming technology in the first place. Screw these cash grabbing, disrespectful crooks. Side note,.. the new monitors will still blur like crazy anyway, so whats the point in having a crisp still image unless you do photo editing…
Unfortunately no 4K 144hz, so I have to settle for the 1440p 144hz. But, luckily this is coming out! Thanks Asus
Ur a silly man and a real angry bitter one at that! You must have AT LEAST 2x gtx 1080 Ti to run 4k at 100fps.. let alone 144!!! Ur nuts. If you really had a 1440p at 144hz… you would be happy and know its all you need on a small 27 inch. You are full of it.
Lol dude, I really have a ROG Swift 1440p powered by 2 980Tis, and there are plenty of games I own and play at max settings with 144 fps. These cards are a perfect fit for that monitor.
When this new monitor comes out, obviously I’ll upgrade my graphics setup too….think about the future my child! I will not use this graphics setup forever, right? Even 2 1080 Tis can play many of the competitive games today at over 100fps at 4K already. What’s next? The new Titans will wreck 4K.
These are 144hz, not 60. Did you read even the title of the article?
I have a 4k monitor too. Only 60hz (crap) but, and on all triple a titles on max settings im getting 40 to 60 fps. Thats shocking. Even older titles up to 5 years old im getting 70 to 100fps. Not good enough. If you have a rog swift 1440p with 2x 980ti you are doing well. Side by side 4k vs 1440 when in motion, the 130fps on the 1440p is superior tonthe blur and lag on a 4k monitor struggling at 50 fps.
60 fps on max settings on a AAA title at 4K with a single 1080ti is great! Imagine two of those, will easily be over 100-110fps. Next gen Titans, now we’re at 144hz no sweat.
I guess I’m a silly angry/bitter man for wanting more performance and resolution in a 27″…
(And Asus and Acer must be idiots for even considering making better 27″ monitors, what are they thinking?!)
Lol what are they thinking. Listen, whats the point in having even 8k if all you get is motion blur. Thats what I am on about. I would love a 4k monitor that ran at 144hz and had ULMB. The issue is, they keep pushing 4k and do nothing about motion blur. A 4k monitor specially a VA panel when in motion amd paning left to right looks like a washed out oil painting that you cant even distinguish ANY details in. This is regardles of resolutuon. BTW 40 to 60 does not mean 60. It means that games running at 40fps will somtimes touch 60 fps if looking at the sky or walk up to a wall face first a stare at it motionless. So with 2xti u will get 70 to 80 at best… almost half of the 144hz. I only game on ultra setting as ultra setting on a 1080p destroys medium settings on a 4k monitor.
I want maximum settings (or within 90% of maximum) on most games at 144Hz with GSync at 4K, all in a 27″ package that fits my current desk and setup perfectly, spaced exactly far enough away from my face to be the right size and healthy focal distance for my eyes. I am willing to purchase whatever graphics solution necessary to drive this, as I’m a gaming enthusiast. But none of this would be possible if no one actually produced a monitor like what’s proposed in this article.
So, I guess you’re gonna blow it, because 27″ is happening, sorry!
Yeah.. not good for those who want a 32″. Glad at least sone people get what they want. Im sure u will enjoy it.
True, but 32″ is a bit of a less popular gaming size segment, especially for the PC side. 32 used to be the de facto small TV size, where computer monitors ended at 30″.
How important is response time in your decision? (You could get a high refresh rate TV). Is your monitor used primarily for pc gaming? If so, that may or may not work for you.
Anyhow, I’m sure you’ll find something and I hope it works out for you. Best of luck friend.
TV’s have to much input lag no matter what gamer setting they have. Thats the reason I went to pc monitors. I have purchased some 32″ 144hz monitors but they had VA panels and so much motion blur it made me feel sick and caused eye strain. Anyways, maybe in 2020 they will bring out something worth buying. Until then, im done with it. My 75″ TV cost 2.6k and needed 2 people to lift it.. 27″ for 2k?? Hahaha they can shove it. I thought the 1k I paid for my current monitor was already excessive. Enjoy the upcoming games friend.
Q2 2017 has come and gone…. and neither of these monitors has been released. Any updates?
27″ is the perfect size for, especially for professional work. Anything larger and it will make you nauseous with extensive use. I’ve got a Samsung 27″ 275r that i’m ready to upgrade. Was considering the Acer XB270HU. However 4K is where its at.
I’ve been at 24″ for over a decade and closing in on two actually (with side trips to 3x 24″ 1920×1200 EyeFinity, which I still run sometimes); and 27″ has never seemed like enough of a step up, specially for a single display setup.
I guess 27″ is just the new 24″, relatively accessible for the largest amount of people, so that’s where they focus all the new gee whiz tech on.
I’d like to see more 32″ models too, ultra wides armed like too much of a sidegrade (specially having used EyeFinity/Surround) but tht new 38″ ultrawides finally scaled that up to the point where it’s interesting, tho I’d still rather go 16:9/4K.
People will SLI 1080 Tis if there’s a reason to and/or GPU horsepower will keep scaling up, it’s actually one of the few areas of PC performance that has seen constant innovation over the years without stagnation…
Seems like every other vector of PC hardware evolution has been sidetracked over tht years by a very of reasons from a single company’s dominance (sup Intel), to parts shortages (sup NAND supply), natural disasters (HDD factory earthquakes), or just general incompetence and the market racing towards the bottom (like with displays for the longest time).
As a PC gamer I’m glad and kinda surprised GPU evolution hasn’t run into more of a rut by now… 2-3 years ago we wondered when single card 4K would be a reality, now we simmer no more, 120Hz+4K will hopefully be a reality in the near future.
this is just a straight lie i have a 980ti and get most games above 100fps at max settings at 1440.
What do you get on quantum break? 100+?.. ur 980ti performs better than my 1080ti. Hold onto that card mate!
27″ is the largest I want. I won’t buy anything larger.
not 2 a person thaT has had a 24inch for awhile. 27 sounds perfect for me as i dont want 1 bigger than that i look from side to side as it is remember th amiga monitors ? lol 14 inch , if ur using ur asus 144hz1ms for not only modern but proper gaming retro as well like me u dont go bigger than 21