Nah. I'll pass. I guess I'll just buy a house instead. :P

I don't think they will be able to get 144 at 4k either, the past few years has pretty much been rebrands everywhere and only the Titan and Ti see notable improvements, yet the 1080 Ti in SLI gets around 70s in Witcher 3. I highly doubt a new Gen will double the performance at 4k even in SLI, i wish i was wrong tho, but i'm tired of rebrands, that includes Intel too milking people with their 4 cores.

Oh god is this again ALL ULTRA OR NO GO, 1080ti can do 4k 100+fps, Volta can EASILY do 4k 100+ fps, the end.

Oh god is this again ALL ULTRA OR NO GO, 1080ti can do 4k 100+fps, Volta can EASILY do 4k 100+ fps, the end.

This. I have no problems playing BF4 on 1440@96fps with HIGH settings. And that's on GTX970. Even then sometimes CPU causing slight fps drop while hitting 100% utilization, and not GPU. Can't do much with CPU hitting a performance cap.

they're not hdr, that's what he is talking about....

Nor would I want them to be, HDR is processing, processing is input lag.

Oh god is this again ALL ULTRA OR NO GO, 1080ti can do 4k 100+fps, Volta can EASILY do 4k 100+ fps, the end.

What's the point of spending 800+ on a GPU if it's not to play with things on maximum settings? We buying titans and Ti to play on medium now? 😛uke2: Even a 1070 can do 4k 100+ with things in low, sorry but your argument is stupid.

Wish it was a 144hz 21:9 3840x1600 panel. That would be the tits. 4k looks amazing in games, but I hate playing 16:9 anymore.

removed

Nor would I want them to be, HDR is processing, processing is input lag.

That's not how it works.

Holy moly ! This is probably the BEST gaming monitor in the world right now. Absolutely amazing specs... ... but probably it costs an arm and a leg and a few other body parts to match.

Quality control for it is also likely to be as abysmal as the XB270HU/XB271HU.

That's not how it works.

It is for TVs as far as I know, I doubt it'd be any different for monitors.

If they charge as much as ASUS is for their equivalent ($2000) and the experience is as bad as PG278Q/XB270HU - then the reviewers really need to start calling these companies out for it. I went through 5 ****ing PG278Qs before I got one with minimal bleed and no dead pixels and no red screen. 5. I only had to go through 2 XB270's but I was more tolerant about the bleed on it because I was tired of shipping monitors back and forth. Some of the ASUS PGs I had the bleed was so bad I'd argue that it didn't even fit the basic definition of a monitor. If Guru3D/Anandtech/Any of the big review sites called them out I bet the issues would go away pretty quickly. If I'm spending $1000 or more on a monitor it better be perfect.

At that price it's true not many will buy it, however if we look at the specs of the Monitor, 4k and 144, you need a beast PC to achieve that, unless it's games like mobas, CSGO and Overwatch which don't push the Hardware that much, as such people can achieve 144 easier, which is better for competitive play than 60. On the other hand if we are talking about 2016 and onwards games that can barely get past 60FPS at 4k even in SLI this Monitor is completely useless for now because for those games people won't be able to achieve 144 at 4k for now. GTA5 for example barely gets close to 100 with 1080 Ti SLI, Witcher 3 is even worse. So yeah imo for now these 4k 144 monitors are useless because it's hard to achieve 144 @ 4k unless its CSGO, LoL, Dota 2 and the likes.

Some of the settings are really taxing for minimal to non existant eye candy to the point you have to print sceen an put both pictures next to eah other to spot it. Anyway that aside 144 hz is not useless a monitor like this if i could aford it .. most likely i would aim to keep it for long long time... plus with gsync even if you game at 50-100 fps in average you have a lot of room for upwards spikes and lower spikes on your fps with out stutters

Consumers like you spend money every year buying a new GPU, cause game forcing you to buy one to keep frames on modern games with ULTRA settings. Good job brainwashed sheepy, Nvidia loves your cash.

How did you come to that dumb conclusion? This is why i stopped coming to these forums, people too entitled and people who make new accounts to troll others (not talking about you). If i bought a GPU every year i would have a 1080 Ti, use your brain before saying crap. :bang:

I do try and crank up the settings to all my games, but the Witcher 3 at 4k on medium settings runs at above 100fps. There is nothing saying you have to run every game on ultra at 4k if you buy this monitor .....and furthermore if you are playing Single Player RPGs with Gsync on there really is not much different between 70Hz and 144hz in regards to twitch reflexes which is typically why someone wants a high refresh rate monitor. To argue against this would be like saying since PS4 pro and Xbox Scorpio will do 4k on a TV which at best gets 60Hz is completely worthless to everyone ( PS4 Pro sales number would argue against you).

I never said Ultra is the way to go, only some salty people who have nothing better to do besides starting BS. I don't think you can see 144 on twitch, but i see your point, 144Hz monitors are mainly for competitive gamers or people too sensitive to FPS changes but that requires a beast PC to run at 4k 144, hence why i said what i did. The idea of testing GPUs at max settings is to see what they're capable of. And the way things have been almost every new year there's more GPUs, so it's never a good time to upgrade, that's why i bought the 1080 cause i expect it to last a long while.

Some of the settings are really taxing for minimal to non existant eye candy to the point you have to print sceen an put both pictures next to eah other to spot it. Anyway that aside 144 hz is not useless a monitor like this if i could aford it .. most likely i would aim to keep it for long long time... plus with gsync even if you game at 50-100 fps in average you have a lot of room for upwards spikes and lower spikes on your fps with out stutters

The problem are not the settings but lazy devs who use new and more powerful GPUs as an excuse not to optimize their games, it's not AMD/NVIDIA fault devs rush their games. It's much easier to inrease the requirements and not work to optimize the games. Deus Ex Mankind Divided is an example of a trash optimized game. The game doesn't have graphics that good and barely has NPCs and doesn't have long draw distance either. I regret spending money on that game.

removed bad comment

So you suffer low frames playing on Ultra, damn poor you.

I honestly don't see what's your point.

:( So it looks like i won't be getting this,2000$ is way out of my budget for a monitor.