Support NeoGAF

[Durante]

That price makes a lot more sense, even though it's regrettable of course.

Isnt there ANY way to scare stuff in windows? There must be some 3rd party program or SOMETHING.

Windows does have DPI scaling.
It's just not particularly pretty for legacy applications which don't support it.

 

[Qassim]

I'm happy 4K 144Hz HDR displays are already happening just because by the time I think I'll want to upgrade (based on available GPU power), it'll probably be another year or two from now, so they'll be cheaper and more refined.

 

[michaelius]

That price makes a lot more sense, even though it's regrettable of course.

At least now I have zero reasons to regret going with "cheaper" 1440p g-sync

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Welp, lol.

I'm still in, I guess (maybe). But for this price this monitor better has flawless quality.

 

[Ozorov]

Apparently Asus said to NordicHardware that the target price is 1199$.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

2000€ is really a lot. You could get a 55 inch OLED 4K TV for this price.

Edit: I hope there will also be some cheaper HDR monitors, because I fear this probably won't encourage devs to implement (good) HDR into their PC games.

 

[Durante]

2000€ is really a lot. You could get a 55 inch OLED 4K TV for this price.

Well, yes. And if LG got off their ass and implemented 120 HZ input while reducing input lag below 20 ms I would.

The sad thing is that the actual price increase in component cost to achieve that is probably around $10.

 

[Zaph]

Ugh, the price increase wouldn't surprise me. It did sound a bit too good to be true.

Maybe Asus were expecting there to be more similarly impressive Gsync monitors revealed at CES?

 

[SmartWaffles]

Isnt there ANY way to scare stuff in windows? There must be some 3rd party program or SOMETHING.

Windows have its own scaling option, and if a program is built with the new high PPI of Windows 8/10 supported it will look fine out of the gate, but for everything else the scaling will simply stretch them causing a very ugly window, or doesn't work at all leaving you small AF elements that are hard to read.

 

[Water]

It won't start with 2.

I guess technically 1999e doesn't. :-D

 

[Paragon]

Windows have its own scaling option, and if a program is built with the new high PPI of Windows 8/10 supported it will look fine out of the gate, but for everything else the scaling will simply stretch them causing a very ugly window, or doesn't work at all leaving you small AF elements that are hard to read.

That's not how Windows 8/10 handle scaling.
That's the old scaling method found on Windows 7 and earlier, or available as a compatibility option in Windows 10.
Applications that don't support scaling on Windows 10 are always rendered at 100% scale and that result is zoomed in to match the DPI scale.

 

[Alo81]

That sucks.

 

[dcx4610]

I've never ran games outside of native resolution. If I'm playing a demanding game and just can't get it to run well at 4k, if I change the resolution to 1080p, how well would it look?

Since 1080 multiplies evenly into 2160, would 1080p look just as good as it would on a native 1080p monitor or would there still be artifacts, blur or distortion? I know 1080p Blu-rays look fantastic on my Samsung 4k TV but I'm not sure how well GPU or Windows handles scaling.

 

[Vipu]

I've never ran games outside of native resolution. If I'm playing a demanding game and just can't get it to run well at 4k, if I change the resolution to 1080p, how well would it look?

Since 1080 multiplies evenly into 2160, would 1080p look just as good as it would on a native 1080p monitor or would there still be artifacts, blur or distortion? I know 1080p Blu-rays look fantastic on my Samsung 4k TV but I'm not sure how well GPU or Windows handles scaling.

I think it depends from monitor.

 

[dr_rus]

Obviously you run the games in native resolution, dpi scaling should be a totally separate process from that

There are games which run in desktop mode (in a window) too, you know.

I don't want a fucking 40" monitor on my desk, are you insane? I want higher DPI. That's the whole point of higher resolutions. 1080p on a 24" monitor is low by modern display standards. The fact that Windows has bad UI scaling doesn't affect what I want and I imagine that as more people get high tea monitors it will become a non-issue, like it already is on Macs. Have you tried a 27" 5K Mac?

What exactly do you expect from me if you don't want something? I have 30" right now and I'm pretty sure that 40" would be a lot better on my desk. I have zero issues with the DPI I have right now and no need to go any higher really - at least not enough to not be able to launch older games on this monitor.

Yeah, let all PC monitors be stuck at laughably low ppi like 100 forever for silly excuses like this. Smh.

Backwards compatibility on PC is a silly excuse now. The more you learn.

 

[eot]

Maybe we should stick with 640*480 then because the HUD in Half-Life doesn't scale

 

[Gemüsepizza]

So it seems there are rumors that this monitor won't offer HDR for HDMI inputs. If this really is the case, I'll pass. I want a display to which I can connect my PS4 Pro and an Ultra HD Blu-ray player to enjoy HDR content. Even 1200€ seems too much imo, if I can only view HDR content from a PC (because I'd have to get an additional 4K HDR TV for my other devices).

 

[Massicot]

I'm still interested in this even if it's closer to 2k.

If I want to pair this (or that acer equivalent) with another monitor or 2, what would be a good choice? Don't think I'm crazy enough for multiple of these.

 

[Water]

I'm still interested in this even if it's closer to 2k.

If I want to pair this (or that acer equivalent) with another monitor or 2, what would be a good choice? Don't think I'm crazy enough for multiple of these.

What would be the main job of the second display - to display static content and/or video? Maybe some cheaper no-name high res VA (27" 1440p? 32" 4K?) so you get a decent amount of extra room and high contrast that doesn't clash too badly with the primary display. Maybe pivoted if the table space and type of content are a good match for that.

 

[Massicot]

What would be the main job of the second display - to display static content and/or video? Maybe some cheaper no-name high res VA (27" 1440p? 32" 4K?) so you get a decent amount of extra room and high contrast that doesn't clash too badly with the primary display. Maybe pivoted if the table space and type of content are a good match for that.

Mainly to have internet browser/twitter/netflix while playing a game.

I was thinking of getting them the same size but going for a larger monitor as a secondary actually seems kinda neat.

 

[dhlt25]

why are these high end monitor so expensive, at 2k I'd rather spend a bit more and get a giant OLED TV

 

[Zeyphersan]

Maybe we should stick with 640*480 then because the HUD in Half-Life doesn't scale

The HUD in Tomb Raider 2 doesn't scale at all so even at 1080p it was impossible to see

 

[laxu]

Rough translation: Asus just informed ComputerBase about the actual price of the monitor. The PG27UQ will have a recommended retail price of €1999 in Germany.

The dream is dead, I'll go for the HP Omen X35 I guess. Seems like they saw the "wow such a low price" reactions on the web and quickly readjusted the price.

Not going to sell me one if that is the price. At a little over 1000 euros I would jump on it. What I really want is something just a little bit larger. I got a 27" 1440p display now and feel it is pretty spot on for that resolution but 4K could easily be something like 30-32".

Sadly it looks like I'll be jumping into 4K on the desktop only next year based on this if there are no bigger 144 Hz panels to be had.

 

[Celcius]

For that price I hope they have a picky person that tests each one in person by hand for quality control.

 

[Vipu]

why are these high end monitor so expensive, at 2k I'd rather spend a bit more and get a giant OLED TV

I guess because they are toptier?
You cant get anything like it from TV side etc.

 

[riflen]

why are these high end monitor so expensive, at 2k I'd rather spend a bit more and get a giant OLED TV

The feature sets of this monitor and the average TV are not the same. TVs are designed primarily for viewing fixed-rate, non-interactive media.

This monitor is targeting PC games, so interactivity is key. Latency and response will be better, motion resolution will be better, allowing you to see more detail on objects in motion. Here's a basic example of motion resolution on an object moving left to right at 960 pixels per second:

And below an almost perfect example of how the object should ideally look as it's moving. This is from another monitor that supports backlight strobing.

People can try this test and more at http://www.testufo.com/. > 60 Hz display recommended.

G-Sync mode will mean there will be no judder from Vsync, no tearing and the games will appear more smooth and consistent, whatever the frame rate.
Lastly, this display has a backlight that's divided into 384 distinct zones that can be controlled separately. This should give a pretty great HDR picture.
The display will likely be one of the first of its kind, so that'll also mean a hefty price tag.

 

[Dictator93]

4K PC gaming is probably saved though.

I honestly love you.

 

[gnexus]

For that price I hope they have a picky person that tests each one in person by hand for quality control.

Yeah, this. Fuck playing the panel lottery with Asus and Acer, especially for that price.

This tech is pretty exciting though, however I'm more than happy with my PG279q right now. I might upgrade to something like this in a few years, once the price comes down to a reasonable level

 

[BolognaOni]

Hopefully panel lottery will be a bit better with it being FALD and this price range, but yeah... Asus with AUO screen. Well they are aggressive at pushing new technology I'll give them that.

Going to take quite a while still, but just maybe the eventual implementation of VRR in HDMI 2.1 will finally get some more panel players in the gaming monitor space?

 

[Alexious]

Come on guys, 2000 euros is way too much. I reckon it's dead on arrival for that price.
By the way, PCPer is saying that rumors point to 1500. I'll contact Asus PR again on Monday and see what I can find out.

 

[FPS murderer]

4k on a 27"? No thanks. 34" min or bust.

 

[Fixed2BeBroken]

People can try this test and more at http://www.testufo.com/. > 60 Hz display recommended.

I get "stuttering" whenever It isn't 144....on this new monitor which I have set to 144.

is that right? or should there be no stuttering with anything under 144?