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

What is the equivalent size vs distance perspective unit ratio wise?

ZxaJuvd.jpg


That is, a 27" at 1.5 to 2 feet at a desk... how many feet back would a 32inch or 40 inch display have to be to fill the same portion of your viewing perspective? Paint an imaginary grid on the far wall for example. Where would the two monitors cover the same number of squares to your viewpoint, compared to the 27inch at 1.5 to 2 Feet? (or vice versa moving the 27" compared to your prefered monitor size + viewing distance).

I'd prefer a wider aspect monitor due to the way HOR+ is used and game's zoom out and HUD limitations, or I'd prefer this monitor to otherwise be 40" so I could run a 21:9 resolution or other windowed resolution 1:1 at 108.8 ppi . However, to be fair, at a desk viewing a 27" 16:9 game world at 1.5 to 2' is as large to your perspective as a larger monitor further away.

In comparing this to other larger monitors some prefer, keep in mind none of them will be 1000nit FALD which is a huge difference. Hopefully that tech will be available in more full featured gaming monitors (low 8nput lag, low response time + modern gaming overdrive, g-sync/variable hz, high hz) in the future though.
 
Last edited:
sblantipodi said:
window borderless does not bring any improvements over full screen.
if the game is not color managed there is improvement with fullscreen or borderless.
Click to expand...
There is if borderless doesn't reset the GPU's LUT.
 
sblantipodi said:
window borderless does not bring any improvements over full screen.
if the game is not color managed there is improvement with fullscreen or borderless.
Click to expand...

Uh? You're totally wrong. In borderless or windowed windows ICC profiles are applied to games - even without a third party app (at least in Windows 10 - in Win 7 I always had to run Monitor Calibration Wizard). In fact, running windowed borderless/windowed even disables the contrast/brightness controls in almost all games. Windows takes over - which makes perfect sense. I'm sure there are a few games out there that behave differently, but can't remember any right now. But as long as you're running in windowed, you can use a third party software to override what the game does anyway.

In fullscreen the software calibration may or may not work, it just depends on the game. Odellus is right.

Anyway, for 2000€, I'm certainly hoping it will have a reasonably good calibration out of the box. If it's really bad out of the box and with no way to fix it with the OSD/hardware - I'll pass. I'm really tired of having to deal with software calibration in games, sometimes none of the workarounds can do the trick.
 
Last edited:
sblantipodi said:
the industry follow the general consensous.
I don't like monitors bigger than 27 inch for PC usage. I use PC on a desktop with mouse and keyboard and not on a couch, so the monitor is pretty close to my eyes and having a monitor bigger than 27 inch ruins the experience.
Click to expand...

there are several 27" options on the market. TN/VA and IPS (which i use atm xb270hu). i had a x34 and liked the immersion of the display. anyway i dont like the bad game support for 21:9. so i would like to have a 32" wqhd 144hz or 37.5" 4k 144hz.
i know a bigger screen is not an advantage but it rly gives you more immersion but x34 also had just 100hz and as i said 21:9 game support...
 
kalston said:
Uh? You're totally wrong. In borderless or windowed windows ICC profiles are applied to games - even without a third party app (at least in Windows 10 - in Win 7 I always had to run Monitor Calibration Wizard). In fact, running windowed borderless/windowed even disables the contrast/brightness controls in almost all games. Windows takes over - which makes perfect sense. I'm sure there are a few games out there that behave differently, but can't remember any right now. But as long as you're running in windowed, you can use a third party software to override what the game does anyway.

In fullscreen the software calibration may or may not work, it just depends on the game. Odellus is right.

Anyway, for 2000€, I'm certainly hoping it will have a reasonably good calibration out of the box. If it's really bad out of the box and with no way to fix it with the OSD/hardware - I'll pass. I'm really tired of having to deal with software calibration in games, sometimes none of the workarounds can do the trick.
Click to expand...

if the application is not able to read the color profile it simply doesn't use it.
 
sblantipodi said:
if the application is not able to read the color profile it simply doesn't use it.
Click to expand...

I don't know what your point is anymore. Are you trying to say that if the game ignores the icc profile in fullscreen it won't work in borderless either? Because if so you're just plain wrong.
 
kalston said:
I don't know what your point is anymore. Are you trying to say that if the game ignores the icc profile in fullscreen it won't work in borderless either? Because if so you're just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes it is what I am trying to say.
ICC profile are used by color managed environments, games are not color managed so no ICC profile is used.
 
sblantipodi said:
Yes it is what I am trying to say.
ICC profile are used by color managed environments, games are not color managed so no ICC profile is used.
Click to expand...

Ok so it actually works but you will just keep on saying it doesn't? Neither me nor Odellus were saying games are "color managed environments". But by using an ICC profile in WIndows you can correct the colours in games, it's just that some of them like like to fight against it so you have to use some tricks. Including windowed mode.

In your link I'm reading $2000 USD btw, where do you see GBP?
 
Last edited:
kalston said:
Ok so it actually works but you will just keep on saying it doesn't? Neither me nor Odellus were saying games are "color managed environments". But by using an ICC profile in WIndows you can correct the colours in games, it's just that some of them like like to fight against it so you have to use some tricks. Including windowed mode.

In your link I'm reading $2000 USD btw, where do you see GBP?
Click to expand...

if its 2k im definitely going to be waiting a bit to buy i mean honestly.. I would rather get my 75 inch tv.
 
I have wanted FALD in a full featured gaming monitor for years but 2500 USD is too high. I'd probably end up waiting for more competition in the FALD/HDR gaming monitor space and more size options at that kind of early adoption price.

The contrast ratio, black depth, and detail in blacks haven't been tested yet. In the future HDR displays will likely go up to 4000nit peak to match the 4000nit standard movies are mastered in. There might end up being higher contrast VA FALD monitors eventually as well. Considering the upgrade and competition options likely available after this , it seems like too much money to pull the trigger on at that price. Like anything the price should drop a bit when competition and better features hit.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
I have wanted FALD in a full featured gaming monitor for years but 2500 USD is too high. I'd probably end up waiting for more competition in the FALD/HDR gaming monitor space and more size options at that kind of early adoption price.

The contrast ratio, black depth, and detail in blacks haven't been tested yet. In the future HDR displays will likely go up to 4000nit peak to match the 4000nit standard movies are mastered in. There might end up being higher contrast VA FALD monitors eventually as well. Considering the upgrade and competition options likely available after this , it seems like too much money to pull the trigger on at that price. Like anything the price should drop a bit when competition and better features hit.
Click to expand...
VA is absolutely terrible for gaming. if the zones on this monitor are as fine as i think they're going to be, the fact that it's IPS shouldn't be an issue unless it has glow problems.
 
Samsung and AUO are going to make some 1440p , 21:9, and 4k modern VA gaming monitors this year so we'll see how the newest ones are. They won't be FALD or 1000nit though. The 1080p samsung one is less than 3000:1 contrast ratio for example and they are probably only 350nit brightness. What I was wondering about was how the contrast and black depth of a 1000nit, FALD HDR VA gaming monitor would be compared to this IPS. Typical ips and TN are 860 to 950:1 contrast ratio and the gaming VA are probably 2800:1. The FALD on my VA TV adds around another third to the contrast ratio but it doesn't have anywhere near the 384 zones of backlights.

It comes down to the fact that there has been no testing of the contrast and black depth on this monitor yet.
Eager to find out.
 
Last edited:
Odellus said:
VA is absolutely terrible for gaming. if the zones on this monitor are as fine as i think they're going to be, the fact that it's IPS shouldn't be an issue unless it has glow problems.
Click to expand...

Most VA have been terrible for gaming but the latest Samsung 24 inch VA seems pretty solid so far.
 
People who think 40" 4k is too big probably have not experienced it or have tiny desks or are Twitch FPS world champ. If you can fit a 40" 4K, the ultra wides and 27" 4k look like toy screens.

Why is it that a majority of people have for the last year or two (including myself) said 27" and 30" 4k stuff is just too tiny to bother with and nothing has happened? Give us high 30s-40" stuff and we'll bite. I've even told management at one large high level hardware company this multiple times and they still won't move.
 
Last edited:
Got kind of excited until I saw 27", definitely needs to be 32". I'm kind of hoping we can get some nice OLED monitors with low input lag anyway. If this thing is $2.5k there's no f*ing way lol.
 
N4CR said:
People who think 40" 4k is too big probably have not experienced it or have tiny desks or are Twitch FPS world champ. If you can fit a 40" 4K, the ultra wides and 27" 4k look like toy screens.

Why is it that a majority of people have for the last year or two (including myself) said 27" and 30" 4k stuff is just too tiny to bother with and nothing has happened? Give us high 30s-40" stuff and we'll bite. I've even told management at one large high level hardware company this multiple times and they still won't move.
Click to expand...

Two 16:9 144hz gaming monitors at 37.5" and 31.5" are planned.. 4k ips and 2560x1440 VA .
They won't have 1000nit, HDR, and FALD (384 zone), so feature wise will be inferior.


The pg279q IPS gaming panel, calibrated, stands out from some other ips as having a
989:1 contrast ratio and .12 black depth.
That is still poor though compared to more capable monitors and tvs. It also has only a 291nit brightness, calibrated down to 119 by tftcentral because it's not HDR nor FALD, and the contrast is poor. The Eizo FG2421 was
4845:1 and .04 black depth.
An example of a modern gaming VA , the samsung quantum dot c24fg70 is
2817:1 and .06 black depth at 40%/169nit brightness (2913:1 and .08 at 60%/233nit brightness).
It covers the whole sRGB colour gamut, 88.6% of the cinema-friendly DCI P3 gamut and80% of the Adobe RGB gamut


Top IPS full-featured gaming panel
989:1 contrast ratio .12 black depth 119nit calibrated

Modern VA quantum dot, full featured gaming panel
2817:1 contrast ratio .06 black depth (at 40%/169nit brightness)
2913:1 contrast ratio .08 black depth (at 60%/233nit brightness)

1000nit, 384 zone FALD, HDR10, P3 color, full featured gaming IPS
???? contrast ratio, ?????? black depth , ~1000nit peak even when calibrated via FALD

HDR Premium Standard/Label
1000nit minimum, .05 black depth , P3 color.

elvn said:
Really, if wishing I'd like this all in a large 21:9 or even wider (32:9?), 2160 high, nearly as wide as triple monitor without bezels. As long as the resolution is high enough, you could run whatever rez you wanted 1:1 in a smaller or narrower window anyway. I think in the far future that's what monitors, VR and AR will be like when a 2D viewing pane is desired. An overabundance of resolution where you just place your virtual display wherever you want in your field of vision.

I've heard nothing about any other full featured gaming monitors (low input lag, low response time, modern gaming overdrive, g-sync/variable hz, 144hz, Hi resolution) having 1000nit peak brightness, HDR and a high density FALD array. This breaks new ground. No tv is going to match these features other than physical size vs distance. There are however a few 4k tv's that can do 120hz native input at 1080p with fairly low input lag (16 - 20ms with FALD and other processing off) but they still lack all of the other modern gaming monitor features.

I've read that samusng and AUO are going to make some other 144hz 3440 x1440 and 2560 x 1440 VA gaming screens in 2017, including a 34" 2560 x1440 if I remember correctly. So perhaps there will be some other full featured gaming monitor options this year without 1000nit, HDR, 384zone FALD.

Edit: These below among others listed on that link. I guess I was remembering the 31.5", 2560x1440 16:9, 144hz VA due out this year (4.5" larger diagonally 16:9 than a 27"). There are larger ips ones like a 37.5" 3840 x 2160 , 144hz planned too. My own interest was the 35" 3440 x 1440 VA when it was 144hz - 200hz but now it's only listed at 100hz on dp 1.2. None of these has 1000nit + FALD, (and many of them are free-sync only) - so I'm more interested in the PG27UQ now.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/high_refresh_rate.htm

Article Change Log - Update 20/10/16

  • Updated status of 34" IPS Ultra-wide panel with 3440 x 1440 res @ 144Hz. Planned production delayed from Q1 to Q3 2017.

  • Added new detail of planned 37.5" IPS panels with 3840 x 2160 @ 144Hz

  • Correction to panel part numbers for 24.5" TN Film panels at 240Hz

  • Updated mass production dates for 240Hz TN Film panels. 24.5" now in mass production from Oct, and 27" from Nov 2016.

  • Updated mass production date for 27" 240Hz TN Film panels, Oct/Nov 2016. Panel part numbers also updated

  • Update to 35" 3440 x 1440 VA panels from AUO. 100Hz versions mass production delayed from June/July to Sept 2016. 200Hz version no longer listed (now 100Hz).

  • Update panel part for AUO 31.5" VA panel with 2560 x 1440 @ 144Hz. Mass production expectation of January 2017.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kalston said:
Ok so it actually works but you will just keep on saying it doesn't? Neither me nor Odellus were saying games are "color managed environments". But by using an ICC profile in WIndows you can correct the colours in games, it's just that some of them like like to fight against it so you have to use some tricks. Including windowed mode.
Click to expand...

I don't know how to explain it to you, if you don't want to believe me, try reading something on the net.
software must support icc reading (color managed environment), if the software do not support icc there is no color space transformation.
This is the reason why good monitors supports hardware calibration where icc is loaded into the monitor and the color space trasformation is done at a monitor level and not at a software level.

unfortunantly gaming monitors does not support hardware calibration so no need to argue on it in this thread.

In your link I'm reading $2000 USD btw, where do you see GBP?
Click to expand...

In the link it's written 2000 GBP, I don't know where you read USD, guys, please try to improve your reading attitude :)
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
I have wanted FALD in a full featured gaming monitor for years but 2500 USD is too high. I'd probably end up waiting for more competition in the FALD/HDR gaming monitor space and more size options at that kind of early adoption price.

The contrast ratio, black depth, and detail in blacks haven't been tested yet. In the future HDR displays will likely go up to 4000nit peak to match the 4000nit standard movies are mastered in. There might end up being higher contrast VA FALD monitors eventually as well. Considering the upgrade and competition options likely available after this , it seems like too much money to pull the trigger on at that price. Like anything the price should drop a bit when competition and better features hit.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/gp...2ud99_monitor_will_release_in_april_for_950/1

LG is presenting a 4K HDR monitor with good color gamut (on paper at least) and it cost less than the half of the Asus monitor.
 
sblantipodi said:
I don't know how to explain it to you, if you don't want to believe me, try reading something on the net.
software must support icc reading (color managed environment), if the software do not support icc there is no color space transformation.
This is the reason why good monitors supports hardware calibration where icc is loaded into the monitor and the color space trasformation is done at a monitor level and not at a software level.

unfortunantly gaming monitors does not support hardware calibration so no need to argue on it in this thread.



In the link it's written 2000 GBP, I don't know where you read USD, guys, please try to improve your reading attitude :)
Click to expand...

I have already done my homework thanks. I have also done my own testing. But I'm not gonna keep talking to a wall so I'm done here.

And your 2nd link clearly says $2000 :p

"It’s scheduled to arrive in North America in Q3 for around $2000 USD (corrected price) according to Asus, although there's a good chance of delay to that we would expect, so we anticipate Q4 most likely."
No doubt it's gonna be more in EU, since we at the very least include the VAT of around 20% in the final price.
 
sblantipodi said:
I completely agree with you.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/gp...2ud99_monitor_will_release_in_april_for_950/1

LG is presenting a 4K HDR monitor with good color gamut (on paper at least) and it cost less than the half of the Asus monitor.
Click to expand...

All of the sites I've seen are assuming that monitor is only 60hz so rules it out as a full-featured modern PC gaming monitor.

According to tftcentral, two 16:9 144hz gaming monitors at 37.5" (LG) and 31.5" (Samsung) are planned.. 4k ips and 2560x1440 VA . There is also a 34" 3440 x 1440 at 144hz supposedly in Q3.

They won't have 1000nit, HDR, and FALD (384 zone) like this asus.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/high_refresh_rate.htm

34” ultra-wide with 3440 x 1440 resolution and 144Hz refresh rate - LM340UW3 – production was originally planned for Q1 2017 but according to recent road-maps it has been delayed until Q3 2017. To run this resolution and refresh rate, a video interface beyond DP 1.2 will be needed, hence some of the wait. We expect it to be a couple of months after the panel goes in to production before we see a monitor announced featuring that panel, and then another 3 months or so before that monitor is released. Taking that in to account, we wouldn’t expect to see a 3440 x 1440 IPS based screen with 144Hz until probably Q4 2017 at the earliest we’re afraid.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Basically, these new 144 Hz 4K HDR displays (Acer and Asus) will be the must have gaming monitors this year. Everything else will be in a much lower "pleb" category. jk ;)
 
Are these monitors able to combine two DP 1.2 signals so owners of older cards can get 144Hz?
 
I seen HDR TVs at Walmart not really impressed with them they might look better for Videogames than the Movie Clips they show....
 
I just hope AUO's issues from their previous panels don't roll over onto these.

On paper, this has everything I want.
 
Comixbooks said:
I seen HDR TVs at Walmart not really impressed with them they might look better for Videogames than the Movie Clips they show....
Click to expand...


Shop is not exactly the correct place to judge HDR. Not only are they in Dynamic torch mode the TV's are also located in a very bright showroom which compresses the contrast range your eyes are able to see. Hell, even OLEDs tend to look poor because of their low peak brightness compared to LCD and blacks tend to look the same because of the bright showroom enviroment. HDR serves little point in bright room viewing, it's meant to be watched in dark room where your eyes are able to actually perceive the huge contrast range increase, from dark shadows to sun brightly sparkling on water.
 
MaZa said:
Shop is not exactly the correct place to judge HDR. Not only are they in Dynamic torch mode the TV's are also located in a very bright showroom which compresses the contrast range your eyes are able to see. Hell, even OLEDs tend to look poor because of their low peak brightness compared to LCD and blacks tend to look the same because of the bright showroom enviroment. HDR serves little point in bright room viewing, it's meant to be watched in dark room where your eyes are able to actually perceive the huge contrast range increase, from dark shadows to sun brightly sparkling on water.
Click to expand...
So essentially, you are saying that for those who habitually use displays in a lit room, HDR isn't going to be as noticeable, and brighter the room, the less noticeable it becomes?

That's a bummer...
 
Some screens labeled HDR are below 1000nit. The HDR premium standard for LCD is a minimum of 1000nit peak brightness, .05 black depth and P3 color. A lower peak backlight can't do HDR minimum experience of 1000nit (HDR movies are mastered at 4000nit). Ordinary IPS can have a hard time delivering that kind of contrast/black depth too (VA tyically has better contrast and black depth). A lot of HDR montiors are currently edge lit as well which isn't optimal. The flashlighting from sides design's downsides are exacerbated when the light is now 1000nit + crossing through dark areas, blooming off bright HDR edges and sources into black areas of scenes compromising contrast and black depth. Good implementations of Full Array Local Dimming backlights would be better by design, or LG's OLED which as I understand it use all white OLED sort of like a per pixel backlight to avoid burning out different colored oleds.
 
Last edited:
Yeah the HDR screens they have at Walmart look like IPS screens at low brightness the black levels really show.
 
chenw said:
So essentially, you are saying that for those who habitually use displays in a lit room, HDR isn't going to be as noticeable, and brighter the room, the less noticeable it becomes?
That's a bummer...
Click to expand...
SDR is arguably better for viewing in a bright room, as the dynamic range is compressed and you can push the brightness up higher.
HDR uses that extra brightness to extend the dynamic range, and not to raise the brightness of all images universally.
 
kasakka said:
I really hope that 32" AUO panel ends up being 144 Hz as well as that is exactly what I would like to see on a 4K display.
Click to expand...
800 nit peak brightness, though. The 27" is quoted to reach 1000 nits.
 


Can anyone that speaks German translate any info that we might not already know?

A couple things from the video I've noticed:

1. The HDR vividness is amazing.
2. The display is quite deep (as expected with FALD).
3. The reflections make it look like semi-gloss which is great!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top