FIRST 4K 144Hz G-SYNC HDR MONITOR NOW AVAILABLE - BRACE YOURSELVES!!!

Aaahhh this is the one the bloke at the E3 PC Gaming Show was talking about. There I was telling my mate the price on this will be inflated and will probably come in around £700.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
 
Lol rather get a good 1440p/G-Sync monitor and spend the rest on a new rig!

And only giving a 2yr warranty on a £2k display, doesn't exactly ooze confidence to me lol
 
What where Acer thinking? This is worse than terrible for a flagship monitor. The moment we accept fans in our monitors the game is over.

If I were OCUK I would think twice about stocking them due to the number of potential rejections and returns.
 
I am still struggling to work out how any 27" monitor is worth more than a 65" OLED TV......
Monitors are normally of much higher quality than TVs due to being viewed from a couple of feet away rather than across a room. This is why you have always been able to get 720p/1080p/4K TVs much cheaper than high end monitors but you wouldn't want to use them in place of a monitor.
 
Monitors are normally of much higher quality than TVs due to being viewed from a couple of feet away rather than across a room. This is why you have always been able to get 720p/1080p/4K TVs much cheaper than high end monitors but you wouldn't want to use them in place of a monitor.
That is not so strictly true these days. It used to be but TV tech has come a long long way in the last decade. I mean have you actually looked at an OLED TV close up? With the right source at 4K it looks incredible. Yes refresh rates are not that great but who has a GPU that can push over 100fps in true 4K with all the settings on Ultra? No one so in some ways, whats the dam point?

Dont get me wrong, i am fully in the "use a monitor for PC gaming and not a TV" camp but TVs are narrowing the gap. I have a 40" Philips Monitor that has a 4K res at 60Hz and its fantastic close up. I used to game at 120hz at a lower res but the trade off of Hz vs resolution is well worth it in my opinion.

Oh and by the way, that monitor cost me 600 quid...... You can see my basis for thinking that these monitors are massively over priced right?

In fact you can pick it up for well under 500 notes now.... https://www.**********/products/43-...-5ms-dpx2-hdmix2-vga-mhlx2-speakers-usb-30-x4

Are these monitors really 5 times this monitor?
 
Last edited:
TVs in the last few years have ****** all over monitors, at least where IQ is concerned. No monitor and not even this 27" 4k HDR comes anywhere close to an OLED TV (even if running it in 1080P mode), I sit the recommended viewing distance of 7-8 feet from my 55" OLED TV though.....

The only real advantage monitors have/had is very low input lag and sync tech of which TVs are getting better at as well as getting adaptive sync support.

I run my OLED TV in 1080P @ 120HZ and it is incredibly responsive and still looks fantastic.

Only reason to buy monitors now are if you want:

- smaller size than TVs
- sync tech
- 21.9 (although you can create custom 21.9 res's on 16.9 displays and still have a huge screen area)
- HAVE to HAVE <10ms of input lag
 
Oof! Been looking forward to this for a while, but not at that price. I think I'll wait until the cards that can deliver 4K at high FPS get here. By that time, monitors with these specs will be priced at a level that's a little easier to swallow.
 
I wonder how much this kind of monitor spec will cost by the time Cyberpunk 2077 is released...because that's the only game I'm really interested in, and what I'll next do a wholesale upgrade of my PC for (inc monitor).

..should have at least 18mths before its something for me to think about :)
 
That is not so strictly true these days. It used to be but TV tech has come a long long way in the last decade. I mean have you actually looked at an OLED TV close up? With the right source at 4K it looks incredible. Yes refresh rates are not that great but who has a GPU that can push over 100fps in true 4K with all the settings on Ultra? No one so in some ways, whats the dam point?

Dont get me wrong, i am fully in the "use a monitor for PC gaming and not a TV" camp but TVs are narrowing the gap. I have a 40" Philips Monitor that has a 4K res at 60Hz and its fantastic close up. I used to game at 120hz at a lower res but the trade off of Hz vs resolution is well worth it in my opinion.

Oh and by the way, that monitor cost me 600 quid...... You can see my basis for thinking that these monitors are massively over priced right?

In fact you can pick it up for well under 500 notes now.... https://www.**********/products/43-...-5ms-dpx2-hdmix2-vga-mhlx2-speakers-usb-30-x4

Are these monitors really 5 times this monitor?

Not everyone has room for a screen larger than 27/28" where the PC is. :( I dont really fancy sitting 2'/3' away from a 40" screen. I would love to get/try a 30/31/32" monitor but it just wont fit. This is why the cost of this screen is a joke. It being "new tech" and hence the premium price I agree in this day and age is ridiculous.

Oof! Been looking forward to this for a while, but not at that price. I think I'll wait until the cards that can deliver 4K at high FPS get here. By that time, monitors with these specs will be priced at a level that's a little easier to swallow.

+1 by that time in 4/5 years when the QA has hopefully improved I will need a new monitor.
 
Back
Top Bottom