4k 144Hz - Acer and ASUS G-Sync HDR Displays over $3k

[Fasterthannothing]

Quote

Select European retailers have begun to take pre-orders on G-Sync HDR-supporting monitors from Acer and ASUS that are expected to hit the market as early as late this month. Pricing of the Acer Predator X27 and the ASUS ROG Swift PG27UQ displays appears to be between €2500 and €3000 with VAT, which looks expensive even when European prices and VAT are taken into account.

Holly crap that's insane prices for a monitor. If this is what the new 144Hz 4k monitors cost I cant imagine what Nvidia's BFGD displays will cost when they come out. You'll probably have to sell both kidneys to afford one.

 

Table with price conversions:

 

Quote

The Acer Predator X27 and the ASUS ROG Swift PG27UQ monitors will be the first monitors to support NVIDIA’s G-Sync HDR technology, with their high-end technology setting them up to fetch a high-end price. From a hardware perspective, they are based on AU Optronics’ M270QAN02.2 AHVA panel featuring a 3840×2160 resolution and a 144 Hz refresh rate, this is a rare combination of features these days. Secondly, the monitors must support the DCI-P3 color gamut and a 1000 nits brightness, another challenging combination to be supported by the backlighting. Thirdly, these monitors feature a direct LED backlighting system with 384 zones, which is currently used on one professional monitor. Last but not least, the monitors need a new scaler that supports NVIDIA’s G-Sync HDR, which was developed by NVIDIA, which fetches a further premium.

Interesting that Nvidia had to make a new scaler for these monitors. 

 

 

Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12637/acer-and-asus-gsync-hdr-displays-listed-and-priced

 

This is only my second post so if I messed something up let me know. 

[Jurrunio]

Eventually there will be a gsync-less 4k 144hz monitor, just a problem of when.

[Crunchy Dragon]

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

[TheSLSAMG]

5 minutes ago, Shorty88jr said:

I cant imagine what Nvidia's BFGD displays will cost when they come out.

I'm going to guess $5000+ all things considered.

[Himommies]

1 minute ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

There a lot's of games that can be run at 4k 144hz as long as you settle for high instead of ultra or whatever

 

[Fasterthannothing]

Just now, TheSLSAMG said:

I'm going to guess $5000+ all things considered.

That's just absolutely insane I would rather buy an OLED TV and a monitor for gaming than spending 5K on a display. 

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

CS: Go and....nope that's it probably.

 

I'm sure many will argue that this is the one case when it's nice to future proof, completely ignoring the fact that by the time 4k 144hz is doable with current GPUs this things will also be 2000 bucks cheaper anyways.

[Himommies]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

CS: Go and....nope that's it probably.

 

I'm sure many will argue that this is the one case when it's nice to future proof, completely ignoring the fact that by the time 4k 144hz is doable with current GPUs this things will also be 2000 bucks cheaper anyways.

R6 and Overwatch can both be run at that 

But you'll need like a 1080ti

[WereCat]

14 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

If I can run Rocket League at 1440p 165Hz LOW settings with GTX 1050 2GB, then I can do it on 4k 144Hz with 1060 6GB and better.

 

But yeah, bye Ultra (even High in many cases) settings!

[dizmo]

I don't know why this surprises anyone. It's a new product, so there's the early adopters tax. Not only that, it's a premium product, as there's few systems that can make full use of it. So anyone being able to power this monitor already has a pretty expensive system.

 

Those saying it'll cost a kidney, or no one can afford this is simply not the target buyer. Lots of us can afford to drop that much on a monitor.

And honestly, as far as a hobby goes, it's not even that unreasonable.

 

This is a Mercedes S Class, it isn't a Honda Civic.

[Notional]

Remember those are Scandinavian prices (Komplett). Even without VAT, they are still a little higher. I would expect around 2k$ for that Acer. 

 

That being said, you can get a 55" HDR OLED tv for the same price here. AU Optronics and Nvidia are just going greed overload. And people whine about the prices of DLC and loot boxes.

 

Well, good thing is that they are basically pricing themselves out of the market, so no need to care. The 35" curved HDR ultrawides will probably be 3k$+.

 

This year, Samsung is releasing their 2018 TV models, where some runs 120hz natively on the refresh rate of the panel, and they support Freesync. So that's a 55" proper HDR tv at less than a dumb 27" monitor. How utterly idiotic. Oh, and don't forget your 1000$ GPU with that Acer (or Asus).

[dizmo]

Just now, Sampsy said:

No it isn't. That's the problem. Its a civic with a shitty spoiler and a gamer sticker slapped on it being sold at the same price as a merc.

I don't see it that way at all.

[Crunchy Dragon]

33 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

CS: Go and....nope that's it probably.

 

I'm sure many will argue that this is the one case when it's nice to future proof, completely ignoring the fact that by the time 4k 144hz is doable with current GPUs this things will also be 2000 bucks cheaper anyways.

I was referring to hardware, not games.

[Blademaster91]

13 minutes ago, Sampsy said:

Yeah. This is way way too expensive. It's signifantly more expensive than a brand new oled TV while being a vastly inferior display. They must be making something like a 50%+ margin on this, if not more. 

I think there is some large margin in these, even with a new scaler and HDR 4K IPS shouldn't be $3k. Although as mentioned you need a lot of hardware to push 4k 144Hz, if you can afford all that the monitor probably isn't that expensive in comparison.

[DocSwag]

And I thought $1k monitors were too expensive...

 

These things are honestly out of the price range of all but the few enthusiasts willing to spend close to 10 grand on their PC setups. For everyone else... 3440x1440 120 hz is the thing to chase IMO

[Cookybiscuit]

28 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I don't know why this surprises anyone. It's a new product, so there's the early adopters tax. Not only that, it's a premium product, as there's few systems that can make full use of it. So anyone being able to power this monitor already has a pretty expensive system.

There's also the fact that for a lot of people this will be an "endgame" product. I can't really see why anyone would want anything better than a 4K 144Hz HDR GSync monitor for a long, long time. Best for the manufacturers to keep this as expensive as possible for as long as possible as people probably wont be upgrading for a while.

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, Cookybiscuit said:

There's also the fact that for a lot of people this will be an "endgame" product. I can't really see why anyone would want anything better than a 4K 144Hz HDR GSync monitor for a long, long time. Best for the manufacturers to keep this as expensive as possible for as long as possible as people probably wont be upgrading for a while.

Very true. I think monitors are one of the most underrated parts of builds. People spend so much money on getting the highest performance..and then stare into a $100 monitor. *shakes head*

 

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Very true. I think monitors are one of the most underrated parts of builds. People spend so much money on getting the highest performance..and then stare into a $100 monitor. *shakes head*

 

I'll fight you with my old AOC 19"er.

 

1 hour ago, Sampsy said:

No it isn't. That's the problem. Its a civic with a shitty spoiler and a gamer sticker slapped on it being sold at the same price as a merc.

No, more along the lines of a Bugatti Veyron or Ford GT at this point in time.

 

Overkill, overly expensive, but if you're wanting the best you can get, you're getting the best you can get.

[Techicolors]

i wonder if GPU will have to run higher than idle to push 4k 144hz at the desktop (no games etc. running). 

 

Also i'm still looking for that Ultrawide 4k gsync panel

[MadyTehWolfie]

2 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

1080ti in sli. was getting 90-120 fps in witcher 3

[Glenwing]

2 hours ago, Shorty88jr said:

Interesting that Nvidia had to make a new scaler for these monitors. 

The previous one only supported DP 1.2 and HDMI 1.4, which cap out at 4K 75 Hz at 4K 30 Hz respectively, so it's sort of expected

[themctipers]

2 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Honestly though, what can run 4K at 144Hz?

Chrome.

 

I really want this monitor. fuck.. it'll fit what my end goal is after 8 years of waiting for better monitor  

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

CS: Go and....nope that's it probably.

 

I'm sure many will argue that this is the one case when it's nice to future proof, completely ignoring the fact that by the time 4k 144hz is doable with current GPUs this things will also be 2000 bucks cheaper anyways.

By the time 4K 144 Hz is available in a Triple AAA game, these things will probably be closer to $500 USD. We've gotten a few games that'll run at 4K 60 Hz on a 1080Ti, that aren't esports or racing titles, which at the current generational pace, should take around 4 generations to hit 144 Hz. Somewhere around the GTX 1680 Ti might be able to do it.

 

Actually, by the time a GPU could really handle that, I think the monitor would be dead.

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

I'll fight you with my old AOC 19"er.

That saddens me. I haven't had a monitor that small in ages!!

I think 22" is about as low as I'd go. It's a great size if you're running more than one.

....I'm assuming that's a secondary monitor for you?

1 hour ago, Technicolors said:

i wonder if GPU will have to run higher than idle to push 4k 144hz at the desktop (no games etc. running). 

 

Also i'm still looking for that Ultrawide 4k gsync panel

Same here, but I want something 40" plus in the ultrawide category.

I have a feeling I'll be waiting at least a couple years.

42 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

By the time 4K 144 Hz is available in a Triple AAA game, these things will probably be closer to $500 USD. We've gotten a few games that'll run at 4K 60 Hz on a 1080Ti, that aren't esports or racing titles, which at the current generational pace, should take around 4 generations to hit 144 Hz. Somewhere around the GTX 1680 Ti might be able to do it.

 

Actually, by the time a GPU could really handle that, I think the monitor would be dead.

I think it's more the fact that you can get more than 60, which is easily possible with a 1080Ti and high settings instead of ultra, or with SLI. Not to mention the performance gains we'll see with the next series of cards using GDDR6. They just went all out and went up to 144, skipping 100, likely because they could and the higher number just sounds better. Plus if you were to knock it down to 1080p for some titles, you wouldn't want to be limited.

[Drak3]

Just now, dizmo said:

That saddens me. I haven't had a monitor that small in ages!!

I think 22" is about as low as I'd go. It's a great size if you're running more than one.

....I'm assuming that's a secondary monitor for you?

It's just my old monitor. Right now, it only gets used if I need to recappitate my NAS or if I decide to reconfig my Ubuntu server and use it again. My main trio of monitors are 3 different 27" panels. A 24" Cintiq Pro might become a 4th.

 

Though I do consider throwing either my 7750 or 7770 back in my rig and using the 19"er/