Asus won

Asus won.

how much?

If we're under $750 I'll be happy

1200 apparently

For what reason?

I guess they'll be cheaper when GPUs catch up?

Honestly modern GPUs and CPUs struggle to get 144 on ultra at 1080p, it's kind of pointless until the tech grows up.

4k is a meme. Refrain from saving up for these until we get 2080s

How long until a single GPU can 3 of these at the same time for the latest games?

lol no they dont.

my 1080 and i7 6700k destroy 165hz at 1440p

Dota, LOL and CSGO run fine at 2160p144.

for the time being*

Next year you will be able to buy these things from vending machines.

By the time there will be a hardware that will allow playing games at 4K@144Hz there will be much better options.

How come every benchmark i've seen then of most demanding games only has them reaching 60-100 hz with a GTX 1080 at 1440p then?

>no gsync
No care

Old games don't count.

How are you doing in Battlefield 1 ultra 1440p?

What's the point? Can you even 3-4 SLI Titans? Because 2 titans certainly won't be able to drive it at max settings with modern games. Or you can buy it to play CSGO and OW in 144hz 4k. But that's just a waste of money.

I dont mean old games, I mean BF1 ultra at 1440p with 170 fps

>literally just bought a 1440p

oh fuck off

Good luck with that.

BUHAHAHAHAHAHA

>Honestly modern GPUs and CPUs struggle to get 144 on ultra at 1080p
no they don't

really making me think

>oh wow lets leave every dof, blur and shit settings on.
>there is no way we'd ever adjust settings tomake it look and run better
who the fuck would ever do that user. lol fucking cmon dude.

i want it, but $1200 is a lot. freesync with 120hz and cheaper casing for $700 when?

You're not playing on ultra then dipshit

>4k 144Hz

This is what happens when a meme goes too fucking far. By the time we have a card capable of playing modern games at 4k 144Hz (that isn't fucking CS:GO) there'll probably have been two or three new panel technologies, panels will be cheaper, and retards will be chasing the 8k meme.

Oh wow.

I'm gladly surprised it doesn't look like any of their ROG monitors.

Those things are hideous.

>these fucking autism lords on this board that actually try to play everything at 4k and or beyond 60fps

thanks for making the "PC master race" look like a bunch of literal assburgers retards you fucking retarded spergs

now shut the fuck up and tell me what game that is

>underage thinks pushing past 60fps is new
Holy shit. Why do I post here anymore. I'm trapped. These children haven't even played a single Quake game.

it's either the shitty slav game or the shitty chink game

Currently have an ASUS VG278HE and this will be next probably.

>arena FPSs were made AND STOPPED being made like 20 fucking years ago

>retarded faggots still for some reason act like they need 144hz to get those dank noscopes in battlefield 1

get a fucking life you god damn cucks

everyone who bought bf1 should kill themselves btw

Is there any commercial hardware that can run 4k consistently at 144fps?

>cucks
k kiddo
BF1 is a meh game. Not terrible.

The main point of high fps these days is for competitive stuff.

you have no principals and or are stupid, enjoy your meaningless shit life you dumb cuck

Sorry FOR preferring ULMB you pleb.

*principle lol fuck me

Lol at medium maybe

>and retards will be chasing the 8k meme
Stick to consoles, kiddo.

>4K
For what pvrpose.
>144Hz
FOR WHAT PVRPOSE.

game logic will never run at 144hz guys

yeah im good with 1440p 165hz lmao keep chasing that dragon tho

>monitor
Who fucking cares? What game is that?

>The main point of high fps these days is for competitive stuff.
Nah, I don't compete but I wouldn't go back. It's so much smoother

>How are you doing in Battlefield 1 ultra 1440p?

>buying a 2160p144 monitor
>to play shitty console games with dead multiplayer on it

Way to miss the point entirely

Unless you're using ULMB it's placebo.

Source: My ass

>2017
>not Ultrawide

Are you joking retard? How is everyone with a 144hz monitor so ignorant and dumb about this shit.
See the ufo test.

Because we can, user.

That's a demo unit I believe.

The real one is hideous, see PG27UQ.

nice

6/10
Made me reply

what the fuck happened, when i searched benchmarks about 1060 vs 480, 1060 buttraped the 480 in 99% of games, i switched out to nvidia just for performance, i always used amd.

Acer is also making one with the same panel. It's supposedly going to be somewhat cheaper too.

It does have GSync actually. The panel was a collaboration between AUO and NVIDIA.

For real though, 144fps looks a lot better than 70.

You can go ahead and stop talking out of your ass now.

@365842745
Not even a you.

You don't have to hit 144FPS to benefit from refresh rate higher than 60. Even 80-90 FPS is going to feel smoother and that's achievable today in everything but the most demanding games on a high-end system.

>hurr it doesn't look any different
>yes it does you absolute retard
>well you're just baiting because I can never be wrong
Die shitlord you've been exposed

theres also an acer one too

Acer got probably the WORST product design of the entire "gaming" bunch of peripherals. Their logo is atrocious, the ""XXXxxPREDATORxxXXX" is cringe inducing.

DELL WINS....

Guru3D botched the benchmarks a couple of times or some shit, AMD fanboys saved the botched charts and repost them. This is the current and fixed 4K FPS chart. Check the article yourself if you don't believe me.

@365842974
Sad

8k on 32" i dont even....

>Posted in Reviews
>product isn't even out yet
>it hasn't actually been reviewed
I ran across that shitstain of an "article" too, but yeah Acer is also coming out with a monitor using the same panel. Supposedly it could be slightly cheaper than the Asus one.

make it stop...

>goldface is 720

Sublte

Stoked that there's all this movement around desktop displays finally. I bought a 1080/144hz monitors and I love them but would gladly upgrade in a few years to the ideal monitor that seems to be headed this way.

>people thought the monitor meme war was gonna be over when we got 4K @ 144 Hz

It's more for actual professionals doing photo and video work instead of gaymen

8K would still be viable for very large panels but at some point the size would be too much for a typical monitor setup at around 1m viewing distance that you would have to move your head around to see the corners of the display.

Hell even if you set the viewing distance further away the size of the monitor will eventually become far too ridiculous to be practical for most households.

The scaling issues will be moronic.

Is there any validity to my hesitance with taking a 1080~ image and going beyond 20-26"? For a television outputting 1080, and probably 4k just cause I hate big TVs, I'd probably only go as high as the low 40s for screen-size. Any merit to this?

>20-fucking-17
>not using a 16k 240hz monitor
fucking plebs

no I cant even tell the difference from 720 to 1080 because the cable streams are garbage anyway and I have a 50".

Now make it $200

I'll wait

No as in I am wrong to think going over 28" for a desktop display, and ~44" for a television is going to result in a noticeably scaled picture? I just think of launching a video game on my 1080 display at a resolution lower than that, and I immediately notice something is off.

AMD always takes awhile for their drivers to catch up, I have a 7970 thats like 5 years old and after all the driver updates its like gained 40% performance over its counterpart, the 680.

No professional would be cached dead working on a monitor like that.
It's more about proof of concept.

just for you user-kun!~

Who actually buys these? I understand it fills a gaming niche, but all these tech companies seem to be investing way to heavily into R&D and advertisements for it to ever be profitable.

>TN Panel
LOL

it wont be scaled if the tv has 1080 resolution

8K minimum would be twice that of 4k minimum diagonal wise so 55"?? fuck me that is huge. 32" 4k OLED with high frame rate would be as far as I would go until good compact AR the size of glasses with foveated rendering becomes a thing.

give me 1440p gsync with higher-than-60hz refresh rate at a decent price, please.

It's gonna happen though. You could already get 144Hz for that.

Depends on distance to the screen. And it would be more noticeable on the PC monitor since they works differently than a TV.

I'm probably very ignorant about scaling methods, but isn't there just some idea about pixel-density being fatter on a larger display thus making the image more padded and less accurate? I imagine this.

>niche

>Playing on lower settings than my laptop
Really making me think

>mfw its only 30hz

I hate how it's always either trashy 60Hz or then something extreme like 144Hz. Even smaller increments are useful.

no it is 1:1 the pixels are just a bit larger but not enough that you would notice at viewing distance.

Before anyone talks shit about the price, it's cheap for what it is

>4k, IPS, 144Hz, HDR, low latency

Remember that we are still paying $1,200 for meme monitors like the Acer Predator X24 and $300 for just 1080p/144hz at fucking TN.

Here's what I know about the Asus PG27UQ.

It uses an IPS panel and it doesn't look like OP's picture. That's probably an early prototype.

The price is expected to be in the $1200-2000 range by reputable sources.

Acer also has a unit in the works with the same panel.

Expect a delay in release, around 2018 seems reasonable. Secondly, wait for them to iron out quality control issues.

>Still no monitors with OLED or something else to surpass the colors, contrast and refresh rate of a decades-old CRT

is Dell UltraSharp U2414H acceptabl for gaminjg

Not really.
I mean why, I can already see individual pixels at 1080p at 23" and I'm also gonna see them if the screen is bigger.
The advantage of bigger screen is still there.
Buy your inches based on how big of a screen you want and your resolution based on how much desktop space you need.

>OLED
Enjoy that burn-in.