27 inch, too small for 4k, besides 60hz, even gsync wont help here.

60hz......wtf.....

I know right, when can we get the right size, with G-sync with at least 120hz? - Personally I would also like the 3D Version 2 option...changes the entire game for various titles!

I don't mind 27" 4K - it definitely looks way better than QHD @ 27" - the 60hz is definitely no bueno for me. I also feel like if I'm going to buy a monitor this year it needs HDR support. My TV has it, watching Amazon/Netflix shows in HDR is awesome. I played a few games like Obduction and Paragon in HDR on it - both looked absolutely incredible. A lot of new games are pledging support for it and from what I understand it doesn't require much effort to implement into games and stuff.

So how many of you whining about 4k60 can even do 4k60 nevermind up to 120?

So how many of you whining about 4k60 can even do 4k60 nevermind up to 120?

Me. I also don't really care for this argument in general. There are people that don't play the latest games or even the most graphically demanding ones. Like in the past 6 months, my most played game by far is Overwatch. On the Ti I can hit 120fps pretty much constant on Ultra at 4K. Second most played game is R6: Siege - I don't play at the absolute maximum because it impedes vision with all the graphics nonsense, but in slightly lower than Ultra I can hit 90-100 fps at 4K with the Ti. Then I also play games like Warframe, which can easily do 140+ at 4K, Astroneer, other random older games, all easily do 140+ at 4K on my 1080, let alone my Ti. Having a 144Hz 4K monitor would benefit me in all those titles. Hell it even benefits me on the desktop. I hate seeing my cursor lag around on my secondary QHD 60hz monitors.

Is this a panel issue with the 60hz limit? or a cable limit? even with DP 1.3/4 out the only model i see use that is the Dell 8k Prototype. Though 4k60 specially to those using 1080ti (sli?) can easily get way above that having monitors do 120/144hz is amazing, its why i stuck to the 1440p 165hz Asus monitor because of how clear the picture looks while gaming

Is this a panel issue with the 60hz limit? or a cable limit? even with DP 1.3/4 out the only model i see use that is the Dell 8k Prototype. Though 4k60 specially to those using 1080ti (sli?) can easily get way above that having monitors do 120/144hz is amazing, its why i stuck to the 1440p 165hz Asus monitor because of how clear the picture looks while gaming

Panel. DP 1.4 can go to 144hz 4K with Lossless compression and/or overclocking the interface. http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/asus-rog-swift-pg27uq-offers-uhd-144hz-ips-gsync-and-hdr.html This is the monitor I'm waiting for this year. 144Hz, G-Sync, HDR, 4K, IPS. Probably going to cost $2000 and a child sacrifice but totally worth it.

They can barely get 1440p ultra wides at 100Hz, and people are here freaking out that a 4K is not above 60hz.... I'm not saying it's not possible and won't happen "soon", but Then there's the fact that HDMI 2.0 does not allow above 60Hz 4K, 2.1 will, but not currently available. Displayport 1.3, the most common supported by most graphics cards is also 60Hz 4K, with some being able to do 1.4 (1080ti/1080/1070 being the only ones really worth mentioning for that resolution and frequency) And then there's the fact that, and correct me if i am wrong, but i can't find anything that is 4K and capable of doing above 60Hz (currently, as the above post shows there is one coming out, when, and at what quality issues, who knows. I have an ASUS ROG monitor, and it's awesome, but man do pretty much every single one of them have quality control issues) Before you reply to me with a TV, you need to make sure that: One: The Hz is not one of their gimmicks that really isn't 120Hz Two: That when it says 120Hz, it's not talking about 1080p. I have seen countless TVs with 4K and true 120Hz, but when you really look into it, it's only 120Hz if you are NOT using 4K.

Funny replies. Since when are you forced to play at 4K on a 4K monitor? You can just play at 1080p if you want, and a "gaming monitor" that can't go higher than 60Hz is just not worth it. Btw, 4K 144Hz HDR monitors should be arriving in a few months: http://*************/g-sync-hdr-monitors-available-q2-2017/ Edit: no idea what's up with the site destroying the link, but whatever. The monitors are on the way.

Funny replies. Since when are you forced to play at 4K on a 4K monitor? You can just play at 1080p if you want, and a "gaming monitor" that can't go higher than 60Hz is just not worth it.

I understand, technically, what you are saying here, but unlike TVs, where something mentioned as 120Hz and 4K, but only if you are watching stuff at 1080p and will likely simply go over the majority consumers head, that would not fly in the gaming market. You know how many people would buy a 4K 120Hz monitor, even if it states 120Hz only for 1440p and below, and expect it to be 4K and 120hz? This would likely be the worst reviewed monitor out there and would be a death sentence for that manufacturer as people would not trust them anymore. So that would never happen. As well, no one gets a 4K monitor to play games at 1080p. Not only does it defeat the purpose, but it muddies up the picture quite a bit.

Panel. DP 1.4 can go to 144hz 4K with Lossless compression and/or overclocking the interface. http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/asus-rog-swift-pg27uq-offers-uhd-144hz-ips-gsync-and-hdr.html This is the monitor I'm waiting for this year. 144Hz, G-Sync, HDR, 4K, IPS. Probably going to cost $2000 and a child sacrifice but totally worth it.

See that would interest me... Though not sure how much i care about HDR atm specially with the lack of support... do any pc games support it atm? or it just ps4/xbone Might have to throw in a kidney as well to pay for it

Funny replies. Since when are you forced to play at 4K on a 4K monitor? You can just play at 1080p if you want, and a "gaming monitor" that can't go higher than 60Hz is just not worth it. .

Problem with that is one you're basically wasting money on a monitor when you are not using it to its full potential, and two down scaling can sometimes make a monitor look blurry (though this depends on multiple variables )

See that would interest me... Though not sure how much i care about HDR atm specially with the lack of support... do any pc games support it atm? or it just ps4/xbone Might have to throw in a kidney as well to pay for it

The games I've tried are Obduction and Epic's Paragon. The new Mass Effect Andromeda and Shadow Warrior 2 also support HDR but I haven't tried either yet. I know Nvidia has been pushing really hard to get HDR included in it's GameWorks/TWIMTBP games and AMD will likely do the same now that they are licensing FreeSync 2 and their HDR latency tech. From what I heard it's pretty easy for devs to implement and from my experience I find that I'd rather have a QHD HDR monitor than a 4K monitor. It makes a huge difference in the contrast of scenes - looks really, really good. I'm hoping it catches on and just becomes the norm.

I wish they would stop pushing "4K" (UHD) for PC monitors below 32". I'd rather see 1440p 120+ Hz monitors using high quality panels like IPS or VA.

There's four such monitors out right now already (Acer, AOC, Asus, ViewSonic.) They're all 27" 1440p 165Hz with an IPS "clone" panel. (LG owns the trademark for the name "IPS", so they call it "IPS-type".)

Yeap, 4K panels at 27" are way to small. Recently I bought LG 4K @27" for my work stuff. Try to play Warhammer, the text was so small I could not read it. 4K monitors should start with 32" choices.

Warhammer total war? At some point they added a patch that allows to adjust UI Scaling. It looks fine.