Agreed. I'd rather see 144 Hz 4K displays at that size. Fast-twitch is great, but if you can't make out the distance details, what does it matter? (I suppose for some games, this is better, but not many.)
Is it reasonable to think we are pushing 4k to 144 Hz? I guess I tend to play more AAA titles than the eSports stuff, but to achieve that frequency at 4k for most modern games I would assume you'd need to turn down settings enough that you would again not make out the distance details. I could very well be mistaken though.
AUO will be following up on this with 27/32" 1440p240 panels in IPS and 27" 1440p240 and 32 1080p240 panels in VA.
Innolux has 32" 4k144 panels with SDR, 10,000, and 1,000,000 zone HDR in work. Assuming they can get the price down, the latter with ~3x3 pixel dimming zones should squash haloing problems and be competitive with OLED.
TFT Central doesn't have a 2019 update on Samsung's plans; but their fall 2018 one was mostly ultrawide/curved panels.
We are fast approaching that being realistic with single card solutions. I have a 1080Ti and it handles almost everything at max settings in 4k around 80-90fps. At 1440 it can easily push 120 for most titles. The thing is that Nvidia went heavy on ray tracing, and they didn't beef up the raster potential of the Turing cards very much over the 10 series. It looks pretty likely that the next gen cards will bring 4k60 to even the lower-mid pricing tiers, with 4k120 possible for flagships (without ray tracing enabled).
Personally, I think antialiasing is a cheap substitute for resolution, and run 4K with antialiasing turned off. In world of tanks medium settings I get 40ish FPS on a 750ti.
check youtube for "4K gaming is dumb" - i'm happy enough with a 1440p (or widescreen equivalent) 144hz that has proper response times, black levels/contrast ratio, low lag, a functional blur reduction mode, good colors, hdr support. I'm still waiting for a monitor that scores well in all these categories.
I'm hoping the new AUO panel entering production later this year is implemented nicely. Current expected specs:
27″ with 1440p (M270DAN06.7) – Sept 2019 with 165Hz, HDR600, Adobe RGB gamut
This gives good resolution, plenty of refresh, some degree of local dimming for HD600 spec and a reasonable gamut. I'd like to see high 90's DCI-P3, but near full Adobe RGB is acceptable.
There are plenty of lighter games to run. I would see running osu! at 4k 1k fps being perfectly feasible. 240hz is mostly for competitive shooters though.
These monitors are made for a very specific niche of users. Namely people who play competitive shooters at a high level or aim to do so. While 144hz may work for them 240hz is noticably better. The same niche generally doesn't want to get a lower framerate by playing on 1440p so that's why these monitors are a thing.
They are probably not for most users though but niches have a right to exist and an ips panel does make it clearly better.
If some fool wants to pay $600 for a 1080p monitor so he can be more L33T in Counter-Strike, more power to him. It funds development of more useful monitors for the rest of us.
Can't have your cake and eat it too. For those serious about the current esports shooter games (Fortnite, CS:GO, PUBG, Apex, etc.), 240Hz is more important than resolution. Resolution is nice, but refresh rate trumps. Problem is there aren't any 240Hz displays with greater than 1080p at the moment, and furthermore it's really tough to find a GPU that can run these games at 240Hz consistently while also at the higher resolutions. Even Fortnite, which is derided as being "an easy game for a GPU", can't run at 4K, shadows off, and at 240 fps. So the serious players choose the 240 frames over the resolution.
Is VESA mounting not a common feature of all these new faster models?
I picked up 2 Dell 27" 75hz Free-sync for last Christmas for kids but before I forgot to check for VESA mount and now all the new monitors I might be interested in myself have fancy stands but no VESA mounts.
One of the very few dells that lacks a VESA mount... you can tell whether it has one or not, the stand attaches to the centre of the back in a square. If it attaches to the bottom of the screen, bad times
Who cares? Seriously? 2019 and we should care that AlienWare wants to sell us a 1080p monitor for $600? This would have been news in like 2013 maybe, but you can get this whole package at $400 if you do some research around less "prestige" branded products.
Do you mind linking me some 240hz IPS monitors? As far as I'm aware this is the first one release in the market. I know other OEMs are developing their own ones and close to release, but as far as I'm aware they haven't released yet.
What’s the actual response time with overdrive on a real-world setting? Nobody uses overdrive on max because it causes extreme visual artifacting, the setting only exists to artificially decrease response times for marketing.
Seems fine for $250, wouldn't pay much more than that for a 1080p monitor though. My current VA-based 1080p 144Hz monitor was under $200 and realistically 240hz is totally unneccessary unless you plan to do 3D glasses (which would be effectively 120Hz)
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
31 Comments
Back to Article
imaheadcase - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Doesn't matter if its IPS, doesn't matter if its 240Hz.. you are paying $600 for a 27inch monitor with a silly 1920x1080 res in 2019.The market is saturated with 27inch monitors, this one does not stand out at all.
CharonPDX - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Agreed. I'd rather see 144 Hz 4K displays at that size. Fast-twitch is great, but if you can't make out the distance details, what does it matter? (I suppose for some games, this is better, but not many.)SmCaudata - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Is it reasonable to think we are pushing 4k to 144 Hz? I guess I tend to play more AAA titles than the eSports stuff, but to achieve that frequency at 4k for most modern games I would assume you'd need to turn down settings enough that you would again not make out the distance details. I could very well be mistaken though.DanNeely - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
LG has a 27" 4k144 panel in the works.AUO will be following up on this with 27/32" 1440p240 panels in IPS and 27" 1440p240 and 32 1080p240 panels in VA.
Innolux has 32" 4k144 panels with SDR, 10,000, and 1,000,000 zone HDR in work. Assuming they can get the price down, the latter with ~3x3 pixel dimming zones should squash haloing problems and be competitive with OLED.
TFT Central doesn't have a 2019 update on Samsung's plans; but their fall 2018 one was mostly ultrawide/curved panels.
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/innolux-latest-p...
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/au-optronics-lat...
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/lg-display-lates...
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/lg-display-lates...
FullmetalTitan - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
We are fast approaching that being realistic with single card solutions. I have a 1080Ti and it handles almost everything at max settings in 4k around 80-90fps. At 1440 it can easily push 120 for most titles.The thing is that Nvidia went heavy on ray tracing, and they didn't beef up the raster potential of the Turing cards very much over the 10 series. It looks pretty likely that the next gen cards will bring 4k60 to even the lower-mid pricing tiers, with 4k120 possible for flagships (without ray tracing enabled).
mikegrok - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Personally, I think antialiasing is a cheap substitute for resolution, and run 4K with antialiasing turned off. In world of tanks medium settings I get 40ish FPS on a 750ti.Spoelie - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
check youtube for "4K gaming is dumb" - i'm happy enough with a 1440p (or widescreen equivalent) 144hz that has proper response times, black levels/contrast ratio, low lag, a functional blur reduction mode, good colors, hdr support. I'm still waiting for a monitor that scores well in all these categories.SmCaudata - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
I'm hoping the new AUO panel entering production later this year is implemented nicely. Current expected specs:27″ with 1440p (M270DAN06.7) – Sept 2019 with 165Hz, HDR600, Adobe RGB gamut
This gives good resolution, plenty of refresh, some degree of local dimming for HD600 spec and a reasonable gamut. I'd like to see high 90's DCI-P3, but near full Adobe RGB is acceptable.
Gigaplex - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Computers are a multi purpose tool. Some people do more than just game on them.Spoelie - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Which beckons the question, why would you need high refresh rates for non-gaming purposes?FreckledTrout - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Make that 2k at 144 Hz then I would agree. Having a 4k 27 inch monitor is almost pointless unless you can seit really really close to it.Great_Scott - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
It's terrible, I know. The worst part of a "1K"/1080P screen in 2019 is that I got away with a RTX 2600 and saved a ton of money.Wait, I saved a ton of money getting a 1920x1080 high-refresh monitor too.
Out of curiosity, how would you drive a 4K screen to 240Hz in any game that wasn't Minesweeper?
qlum - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
There are plenty of lighter games to run. I would see running osu! at 4k 1k fps being perfectly feasible. 240hz is mostly for competitive shooters though.saratoga4 - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
>The worst part of a "1K"/1080PThe "K" is the width, not height (4k is ~4000x2000) so 1920x1080 is 2K. 1K would be the 540p you sometimes see on slow twitch streams.
qlum - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
These monitors are made for a very specific niche of users. Namely people who play competitive shooters at a high level or aim to do so. While 144hz may work for them 240hz is noticably better. The same niche generally doesn't want to get a lower framerate by playing on 1440p so that's why these monitors are a thing.They are probably not for most users though but niches have a right to exist and an ips panel does make it clearly better.
DigitalFreak - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
If some fool wants to pay $600 for a 1080p monitor so he can be more L33T in Counter-Strike, more power to him. It funds development of more useful monitors for the rest of us.koaschten - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
This is especially stupid considering the max brightness of 350 nits *laughs*limitedaccess - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
At the same time it's 27in which is turn off for the really competitive/pro players as they find it too big.Moizy - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Sorry, I said the same thing in my comment, didn't see yours. AgreedMoizy - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Can't have your cake and eat it too. For those serious about the current esports shooter games (Fortnite, CS:GO, PUBG, Apex, etc.), 240Hz is more important than resolution. Resolution is nice, but refresh rate trumps. Problem is there aren't any 240Hz displays with greater than 1080p at the moment, and furthermore it's really tough to find a GPU that can run these games at 240Hz consistently while also at the higher resolutions. Even Fortnite, which is derided as being "an easy game for a GPU", can't run at 4K, shadows off, and at 240 fps. So the serious players choose the 240 frames over the resolution.SwordDancer - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
This monitor should have either been 1440P at 27" or 1080P at 24".Asidewaysbanana - Thursday, September 5, 2019 - link
You do realize that it's not possible to have 240hz at 1440p?240hz is limited to 1080p, and was limited to TN panels but this is the first IPS 240hz released.
sparkuss - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Is VESA mounting not a common feature of all these new faster models?I picked up 2 Dell 27" 75hz Free-sync for last Christmas for kids but before I forgot to check for VESA mount and now all the new monitors I might be interested in myself have fancy stands but no VESA mounts.
yetanotherhuman - Tuesday, September 3, 2019 - link
One of the very few dells that lacks a VESA mount... you can tell whether it has one or not, the stand attaches to the centre of the back in a square. If it attaches to the bottom of the screen, bad timesFullmetalTitan - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Who cares? Seriously?2019 and we should care that AlienWare wants to sell us a 1080p monitor for $600?
This would have been news in like 2013 maybe, but you can get this whole package at $400 if you do some research around less "prestige" branded products.
Asidewaysbanana - Thursday, September 5, 2019 - link
Do you mind linking me some 240hz IPS monitors? As far as I'm aware this is the first one release in the market. I know other OEMs are developing their own ones and close to release, but as far as I'm aware they haven't released yet.Guspaz - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
What’s the actual response time with overdrive on a real-world setting? Nobody uses overdrive on max because it causes extreme visual artifacting, the setting only exists to artificially decrease response times for marketing.Samus - Wednesday, August 28, 2019 - link
Seems fine for $250, wouldn't pay much more than that for a 1080p monitor though. My current VA-based 1080p 144Hz monitor was under $200 and realistically 240hz is totally unneccessary unless you plan to do 3D glasses (which would be effectively 120Hz)xeal - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
I stopped reading at "offering a 1920x1080 resolution".koaschten - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
I stopped at 350 nits brightness.Pau - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
i did prefer a monitor with higher resolution, at least 4k, the 240Hz dont make that big diference a display with 140 hz and 4k would be much better