ASUS announces Swift PG27UQ 4K IPS 144Hz G-Sync HDR monitor

M

Martha Stewart

Gawd
Joined
Apr 14, 2011
Messages
668
http://videocardz.com/65369/asus-announces-swift-pg27uq-4k-ips-144hz-g-sync-monitor


pg27uq-front.jpg
 
The LED backlight is dynamically controlled across 384 zones, enabling very high contrast for richer, more natural dark scenes. Quantum-dot technology provides brighter images and supports the cinema-standard DCI-P3 color gamut. DCI-P3 has a 25%-wider color range than sRGB, resulting in more realistic colors.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff here, but a little ambiguous. Does this imply some kind of full array local dimming?
 
That's what I took it to mean. If so that's pretty cool and I imagine, going to cost us a pretty penny.
 
I am in the market for a new monitor that will very likely be a 4K display. I was about to pick up one of the LG 2016 4K models which are quite lauded indeed, but I decided to wait until the 2017 announcements - I'm glad I did! Provided that this display is a "true" 4K, not using Pentile tech or whatnot and the panel is of high quality with low backlight bleed / no-PWM dimming, this pretty much checks most of the boxes. 4K, HDR with great brightness/contrast, Quantum Dot wide color gamut + 10-bit, IPS panel at 144hz!, DisplayPort + HDMI, Adaptive Sync (in this case, GSync). That's a pretty wide list of disparate specs that usually require compromises (ie 144hz can often mean a TN panel etc). The only issues I can see are A) the price will probably be pretty high and B) GSync probably contributes to such a high price and I personally favor FreeSync instead. I suppose I could say that if they really wanted to max it out an IGZO panel or even OLED would be even better, but that would push the high price even higher and may have questionable benefits.

I wonder if they can make a model that is exactly the same spec-wise (hell, sure make it design wise as well) but substitutes GSync with that new FreeSync 2.0 certification (given that its a HDR panel it would qualify) instead, and likely bring down the pricee! Alternately, I wonder if they could make a 30-34" variant with similar specs as well. In any case, if this is a look at things to come in 2017 that's off to a good start.
 
I'm pretty excited for this but I need to wait and see how much it will cost and how good or bad the quality control is. I know the previous Swift models didn't have the best quality control. Also, 4K needs more GPU power so I'd have to upgrade to the upcoming 1080Ti as well.
 
That sounds amazing. If it's FALD (full array local dimming) with that many zones and 1000nit HDR that is probably a first in gaming monitors. 144hz dp 1.4 and g-sync as well. I'd like a larger version as others have said but if this monitor does what it seems to by the specs it would be the top gaming monitor feature wise until something else comes out to match it.
 
Yeah this is a first of its kind with the use of 384 local dimming zones in a PC monitor. 1000 nits with FALD should display high quality HDR compared to those awful edgelit TVs and monitors from Samsung.
 
Mokkat said:
That would be amazing!

if it had a regular stand, ugh
Click to expand...

"with this display supporting VESA mounts for easy mounting to monitor arms and other display mounting solutions."
 
Can DP 1.4 even do 4K @ 144hz with 10 bit color? I thought it was limited to 120hz with HDR? Maybe 144hz is the max refresh for lower resolutions, like 1440p?

And what sort of GPU power do you need to power 4K @ 120hz with HDR?? 3 1080Ti's? Guess my kids aren't going to college after all!
 
I can finally buy a high refresh rate monitor... Hopefully they don't make it stupid expensive.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. So this would mean NVIDIA created an entirely new Displayport 1.3/1.4 G-Sync chip.

Not caring for 27" though, doesn't really show off the benefit of 4K.
 
Do you guys that want lower PPI not appreciate high PPI phones, tablets and laptops? I'm very ready to be done with the 110 PPI and under thing. Hell, I wish this was 5k so I could run at 200%.
 
Are we really ready for 4k gaming at those refresh rates though? 2k at 100hz seems to still be the sweet spot unless I'm missing something.
 
Hopefully this means they might drop the price on the PG348Q a little more...
 
Reports I've read say 1440p upscales great on a 4k, somewhat counter-intuitively, better than 1080p scales so that would help vs gpu power limitations. Check some 1440p benchmarks on the top of the line gpu's singly at very high, very high+ (custom), and ultra and the frame rate is very high on most games.

HDR on an ips rather than a VA is an odd match but the 1000nit quoted and if true FALD that could help the contrast ratio and black depth a lot.

I think a modern problem is a lot of people took the trade-offs of a larger TV (in most cases 60hz and all lacking modern gaming monitor features like variable hz and gaming overdrive), sitting further back, for gaming and aren't interested in sitting 1.5 to 2' away from a monitor at their desk anymore (where the monitor size would still be "large" filling a lot of their perspective/viewpoint). Personally I would love something like this in a 40" at a desk where I'd still have around 108.8ppi and would have the option of upscaling 1440p or running games 1:1 pixel at 21:9 with bars or some other windowed resolution while still getting all that desktop/app space unscaled.

Yeah Q3 is a long way off too.. ugh. We prob won't see a full featured gaming oled for 2 - 3 yrs at this rate. I'll wait to compare the 21:9 1440 and 4k high hz VA's coming out but this monitor definitely checks a lot of boxes and 1000nit + FALD is unheard of on a full featured (variable hz, gaming overdrive, low input lag, high hz) gaming monitor.
 
Last edited:
Why do they have to keep sticking to so small size for such huge res. 4K at the very minimum should be 32", very minimum. Even 40" is a perfectly fine size for 4K. I don't like this trend. I'd personally prefer 30~32" @ 1440p already.

Good specs at a very reasonable price though gotta say, was expecting even a couple hundred $100 more.
 
Just bought the pg348q because "there shouldn't be any huge leaps soon". Sure. 144hz hdr ips 4k.
 
I really hope the QC isn't horrible for this display, this is pretty much the display I've been waiting for ever since the PG278Q. Though I do wish it was a 30-32".
 
Good to finally see FALD make their way to monitors, this is the biggest takeaway for me.
And 384 zones on a 27'' is not bad at all.
 
Wow, I'm hyped. I actually really like the idea of 4k on 27" (means I will have to worry about AA even less than I already do with 1440p@27" :p ). This does mean a GPU upgrade as well though. But I've got the money thanks to my new job so it's all good. Of course we'll have to see about quality control once again...
 
I sincerely hope some of the AU Optronics panel issues do not carry over into the next generation because if people were pissed off playing roulette at $799... wait til you do it with this.

On paper, this might be "the one" for a lot of us. Watching and hoping.
 
So, who has the graphics power to run a consistent 144 FPS at 4K? That's not possible even with a Titan XP, at least not when considering new games at high settings. Doom has an outside chance of hitting that target, I suppose.

I think this is a year too early to the market.
 
Terpfen said:
So, who has the graphics power to run a consistent 144 FPS at 4K? That's not possible even with a Titan XP, at least not when considering new games at high settings. Doom has an outside chance of hitting that target, I suppose.

I think this is a year too early to the market.
Click to expand...

You don't need a consistent 144fps with G-Sync, its just nice to not have be restricted to 60 fps.
 
Last edited:
that's what g-sync is for, though it's not a "fix" for low frame rates imo. I'd shoot for 100fps-hz average as a target, which means I'd probably have to run 1440p upscaled on the most demanding games when I upgrade. Looking up 1080 sli vs single titan.. on a lot of games it's like 16fps less on titan 1440p.. gta V is 20 fps diff.. 4k gta V is 94.9fps vs 62.8 fps single titan though.

gtx1080 sli /vs/ single titan(pascal):
witcher3: 1440p 112.3fps / 96.6 fps ... 4k 75.6fps / 57.6fps
GTA V:__1440p 140.4fps / 120.7 fps , 4k.. 94.9 fps/ 62.8fps

Dual card seems more like a requirement for 4k at high fps-hz unsurprisingly, and even then would require dialing down from the aribitrary "ultra" ceiling a bit on the most demanding games (like witcher3) to hit the 100fps-hz average target in the case of gtx 1080sli. GTAV is very close with 1080 sli at 4k being 94.9fps average however. The best I could find about BF1 sli was an intense multiplayer benchmark showing gtx 1080 sli getting 82.7 fps-hz average at 4k, titan pascal 69.2 fps-hz average at 4k.

By upscaling 1440p you could hit the 100fps-hz average mark (much higher on some games) and use g-sync to ride the graph dynamically from 70 - 100 - 140 (160 even depending on the game). Here is an example of a frame rate graph showing fps(fps-hz with g-sync) at around 100fps-hz vs 60fps-hz to give an idea of the actual ranges.

blur reduction/motion clarity increase 100fps-hz ave:
0% <- 20%(~80fps-hz) <-- <<40% (100fps-hz)>> -->50%(120fps-hz)->60% (144fps-hz)
and motion definition/path articulation/smoothness wise
1:1 -- 1.x:1 (~80+ f-hz) <--- << 5:3 (100fps-hz)>> --> 2:1 (120fps-hz) -> 2.4:1 (144fps-hz)

So even with g-sync if you are around 60fps-hz average your actual graph is more like 30 - 90 which means you are only hitting 20% - 30% blur reduction in 1/3 of the wildly dynamic graph. That means you'd only get a dynamic "vibrating" mix of the top 1/3 of the graph thrown in to the blend of 2/3 full blur and very low motion definition. And that top 3rd mixed in the blend being only being 20 - 30% reduction at that. That is why I shoot for 100fps-hz average as a target so my range follows the colored example range I posted above. That way g-sync allows me to get 100 to 144fps 2/3 of the graph in a mix/blend. 120fps-hz or 140fps-hz average would be even better when possible obviously, like GTAV can do at 1440p, so the low end blended in would only hit 90fps-hz or 110fps-hz, respectively.
 
Last edited:
Q-BZ said:
I sincerely hope some of the AU Optronics panel issues do not carry over into the next generation because if people were pissed off playing roulette at $799... wait til you do it with this.

On paper, this might be "the one" for a lot of us. Watching and hoping.
Click to expand...
Do we even know that it is an AUO panel? I haven't seen any mention of the panel manufacturer.
Terpfen said:
Notice that I made no mention of G-Sync in my post.
Click to expand...
Why would you run with a static refresh rate on a monitor equipped with variable refresh rate? Might as well save money and get something from BenQ.

144 Hz G-Sync just means you have room for hardware upgrades without needing to upgrade your monitor. It also means you don't have to worry about framerate, for the most part, with the 30-144 Hz range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top